Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 11:52 AM ET, 01/10/2011

Why Jared Loughner hated Rep. Gabrielle Giffords

By Ezra Klein

Nick Baumann spoke to Bryce Tierney, a friend of Jared Loughner's, about the nature of Loughner's grudge against Giffords:

Tierney, who's also 22, recalls Loughner complaining about a Giffords event he attended during that period. He's unsure whether it was the same one mentioned in the charges -- Loughner "might have gone to some other rallies," he says -- but Tierney notes it was a significant moment for Loughner: "He told me that she opened up the floor for questions and he asked a question. The question was, 'What is government if words have no meaning?' "

Giffords' answer, whatever it was, didn't satisfy Loughner. "He said, 'Can you believe it, they wouldn't answer my question,' and I told him, 'Dude, no one's going to answer that,'" Tierney recalls. "Ever since that, he thought she was fake, he had something against her."

You imagine that Giffords might have gone home that night and laughed with her husband about the bizarre questions you sometimes get at these constituent meetings. And Loughner went home and began to stew.

By Ezra Klein  | January 10, 2011; 11:52 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Who is the financial sector ripping off?
Next: Lunch Break

Comments

From WashMonthly:
We, the Tea Party of Indiana, condemn the violent actions of the lone gunman in Tucson, Arizona. Furthermore, we condemn the hateful rhetoric and blame pointing of liberal blogs like this one.

Only a mentally unbalanced person would literally believe the Tea Party proclamations that this congressperson was THE ENEMY intent upon destroying OUR COUNTRY.

When her opponent in last fall’s election held a fund raiser called “Help remove Gabrille Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M-16…” only a nutjob would believe that was a call for violence.

When Sarah Palin posted on her web site a rifle scope crosshair at Giffords’s district, only a mentally deranged person would believe that was meant to be taken literally.

When our candidate in Nevada called for “2nd Amendment Remedies” if Tea Party candidates lost, only a nutjob would take that literally.

When our respected talk show hosts call for “Taking back our country”, only a mentally unbalanced person would believe that was a call to violence.

The shooter in Tucson was a lone, mentally deranged nutjob. Therefore, it is unfair and slanderous to blame the Tea Party or republican politicians.

Now, about that traitorous RINO Dick Lugar who we have targeted for political extermination in 2012…
Posted by: RepublicanPointOfView on January 10, 2011 at 8:38 AM

Posted by: AZProgressive | January 10, 2011 12:00 PM | Report abuse

And Loughner went home and began to stew....

Then his dad flicked on Glenn Beck...
And together they watched the good professor...
Draw contorted chalk lines linking various enemies of America together...

Posted by: AgaBey | January 10, 2011 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Teabags says:

When her opponent in last fall’s election held a fund raiser called “Help remove Gabrille Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M-16…” only a nutjob would believe that was a call for violence.

Right. I agree.
So why is this candidate inciting nutjobs to violence?
How is that responsible or even sane leadership?

Posted by: AgaBey | January 10, 2011 12:07 PM | Report abuse

The whys have to include influences. Especially because he was mentally unstable, his reasoning, such as it was, was therefore more liable to be influenced by what he heard and read. Jared Loughner was indeed linked to white extremist groups, including American Renaissance, and watched Fox News every day, and frequented anti-government conspiracy sites all the time. These same influences influence the majority of Tea Party activists, whether you are trying to be "on the other hand" or not.

Posted by: JF11 | January 10, 2011 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Everyone see the following, yet? It's rather extensive, and disturbing.

The progressive “climate of hate:” An illustrated primer, 2000-2010

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

Posted by: msoja | January 10, 2011 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Ezra,
If you had even an ounce of journalistic integrity you would feel compelled to include the approximate date of the event you cite as the origination of Loughner's hatred for Giffords. It was 2007.

You might then feel compelled to point out that no one in this country outside of Alaska knew who Sara Palin was until August of 2008. But, we know that you like most of the other left-wingers in the press want to continue to fan the flames of hate against Palin and other conservatives, so you will likely continue to only publish information about this tragedy that advances your political cause.

And for that, Ezra, you should be ashamed.

Posted by: dbw1 | January 10, 2011 12:48 PM | Report abuse

msoja,

The Left-ing climate of Hate article you linked was, indeed, an eye opener.

Posted by: WrongfulDeath | January 10, 2011 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, saw that msjoa.

Wow, that really was a "culture of hate" as proven by:
- A couple art works
- Some graffiti
- A pop star
- One comedian
- Some choice commenters on lefty web sites (google "nut-picking")
- An alternate-history fake-documentary
- Aome satiric photos of John McCain
- Activists against hate-mongering anti-gay folks
- Some isolated trespassers
- A few misguided folks thinking they're practicing civil disobedience
- A couple militant pro-immigration activists
- Some stupid young people vandalizing stuff

What I don't see:
- Any Democratic leaders, lefty group organizers, or any sort of authority figures egging them on. Zero.

Now's where you post those Obama/Rahm quotes which show ... that Obama was really upset one time? That Rahm didn't like Bill Schaeffer, or something? There's no relation between the leaders on the left and supposed hateful lefty activists, while there's a close-knit and understood relation between Tea Party leaders and many of their looney followers.

Posted by: Chris_ | January 10, 2011 12:50 PM | Report abuse

@dbw1

Thanks.

Funny how when Ronald Reagan is shot, its not partisan at all.......

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Also waiting to see if Ezra will publish links to the articles/blogs with interviews of past Loughner friends and classmates that paint Loughner as someone 'frustrated with the Bush administration', and believing that Bush was behind 9/11. This would plant Loughner firmly among the polls that reflect the views of a lot of Democrats.

However, I'm sure Ezra and other left-wing media members will continue to selectively edit their coverage in order to continue painting the shooter as someone who was receiving subliminal marching orders from Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

Why can't leftists just realize that there are crazy people among us. And why, in the face of tragedy, are left-wingers always seeking to score political points before all the facts are even known?

Credit to NBC yesterday morning....I only got to watch about 10-15 minutes of "Meet the Press", but in that time I didn't hear any implication of "right wing radio" or the Tea Party.

Contrast that to ABC's "This Week", where Christiane and Stephanoplous spent about 55 minutes continuously pondering whether Sarah Palin and the Tea Party were somehow to blame...before giving George Will the last 2 minutes to bring some level-headedness to the program.

Posted by: dbw1 | January 10, 2011 1:09 PM | Report abuse

@krazen1211:

I don't recall Ted Kennedy encouraging people to pack heat to Ronald Reagan's events.

I don't recall Walter Mondale saying that Reagan was deliberately trying to destroy the country.

I don't recall Jimmy Carter speaking of "second amendment remedies" should he lose the election.

People genuinely believed Reagan was mistaken and foolish, but no one called him evil or drew elaborate conspiracy theories around him. John Hinckley's motivation, to the extent it has any clarity, derived from a sexual obsession with Jodie Foster. There was no evidence of a political component at all.

The same apparently cannot be said of Loughner. Though his motives are as confused and bizarre as Hinckley's, they do appear to depend upon right wing rhetoric.


Posted by: pj_camp | January 10, 2011 1:10 PM | Report abuse

"I don't recall Ted Kennedy encouraging people to pack heat to Ronald Reagan's events.

I don't recall Walter Mondale saying that Reagan was deliberately trying to destroy the country.

I don't recall Jimmy Carter speaking of "second amendment remedies" should he lose the election."


Then, obviously, there is some cause other than political rhetoric. Thanks for proving the point.

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Chris_:
"There's no relation between the leaders on the left and supposed hateful lefty activists, while there's a close-knit and understood relation between Tea Party leaders and many of their looney followers."

Ummmm, google "Greece riots".

I listen to quite a bit of left-wing radio (which puts me at odds with most of America...ha ha ha), mostly Thom Hartman and Mark Thompson (Make it Plain).

I frequently hear them use words and phrasing talking about politics as 'a battle', 'we have to take them [conservatives] down', etc. Mark Thompson was just talking this past week about how the DNC is drawing up a 'target list' of vulnerable GOP seats for 2012.

So, if something happens to one of these 'targeted' GOP members, is it the fault of the 'hate speech' of the DNC and left-wing radio?

Or course not, any rationale person would say. But then again, most of the leftists on here are not rationale.

Posted by: dbw1 | January 10, 2011 1:20 PM | Report abuse

"The same apparently cannot be said of Loughner. Though his motives are as confused and bizarre as Hinckley's, they do appear to depend upon right wing rhetoric."


No, not really. You're just making that up.

There's no evidence that Jared Loughner even listed to 'right wing rhetoric'.

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 1:22 PM | Report abuse

It is a sad week in our vis-a-vis democracy.

We should mourn for those lost and hurt, we should be grateful for the courage and heroism of those who helped bring about an end to the massacre.

In the end, I hope we can come together and understand that the foundations of our democracy cannot be unsettled by the act of a cowardly lone demented individual.

This situation rests on the shoulders of one insane individual and finger pointing will only further the cause of the mentally unstable gunman. "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

God Bless America.

Posted by: RisingTideLiftsAllBoats | January 10, 2011 1:25 PM | Report abuse

@krazen: "There's no evidence that Jared Loughner even listed to 'right wing rhetoric'."

And, what if he did? Perhaps he had listened to Gifford's read the First Amendment on the constitution before he finally snapped. Should we then curtail the public reading of the constitution?

Folks keep pussy-footing around. If the problem is that conservatives have access to the public via talk radio and Fox News, I think people should just go ahead and say so. Because, obviously, as long as conservatives can express themselves openly in public forums, or campaign for elected office, the violence will continue.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 10, 2011 1:29 PM | Report abuse

"And, what if he did? Perhaps he had listened to Gifford's read the First Amendment on the constitution before he finally snapped. Should we then curtail the public reading of the constitution? "


Liberals would at least be respectable if they presented their case as a possibility. Anything is possible.

Instead they leap to conclusions. Kind of curious for the people who believe in 'right to a fair trial' and 'scientific method' and all that.


By the way, did you know that Jared Loughner was a 911 truther?

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Well, that was a meaningful and comprehensive explanation of the tragedy, helping us to understand its place in the larger context of American political culture.

Posted by: JohnCMulligan | January 10, 2011 1:33 PM | Report abuse

To all the liberals and progressives posting about how right-wing rhetoric might have inspired this guy...

Please check your facts. There's little to no evidence that Loughner was remotely right wing, that he listened to Fox or liked Palin, or that he was even conservative.

If you can derive anything at all from his youTube page, or the statements of his friends, the closest political label would probably be anarchist. He sounds a lot like any of the grunge anarchist potheads you will find living downtown in urban hipster communities. They also share a lot of belief in conspiracy theories.

Neigther being anti-government, nor being extremely paranoid is a uniquely right-wing point of view.

But, to be perfectly honest, I would not assign this guy with ANY ideological tag. He was an insane person with his own deranged philosophy that drew on a scatter-shot array of sources from both left and right ... and a number of radicals who are themselves uncategorizable.

Making the assumption that this guy was sitting down listening to FOX in the evening just shows you havn' actually bothered to look up the facts first hand. Anyoen whose seen this guys YouTube videos will realize that FOX is not his major influence.

Posted by: tjk1 | January 10, 2011 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Really, the Greece riots prove that US liberal leaders lead a US progressive culture of hate?

I haven't listened to liberal talk radio in a while, so I haven't heard of the guys you mention. Do you think they're leaders in the progressive movement? At the very least, they don't have Limbaugh-like audiences.

The only guy that I can think of that's comparable to Rush/Hannity/Beck or the many, many other conservatives who think it's end-of-days w/ Obama is Olbermann. But he's notable only because he's the only one doing that shtick on the left, not because he exerts power within the Democratic Party (remember when Limbaugh was the honorary member of GOP '94 members?) And the only lefty doing that sort of thing who's actually in a position of power was Alan Grayson, and he wasn't exactly a force to be reckoned with within the party, either.

I think all this just points out the obvious: Conservative, black-and-white worldviews lend themselves to this sort of rhetoric. That's why liberals prefer NPR's level-headed (and sometimes boring) policy-talk rather than hot-headed firebrands on the failed Air America, and it's why William F. Buckley-like conservative intellectuals are no longer influential within the GOP (questioning things obviously means you're a RINO).

Posted by: Chris_ | January 10, 2011 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Whew..
It's getting hot in here!
Sorry I wrote those two early posts.
Mind if I play some Glenn Beck elevator music to calm everyone down?

Here goes:

''I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. ... No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out.''


Ah....
Soothing....

Posted by: AgaBey | January 10, 2011 1:38 PM | Report abuse

any sane, patriotic, intelligent american will now see the essence of the tea party movement as a blight on our nation...without a doubt.
the tea party planted hate, and they sowed hate.

there is no revising their words, no excuses or accusations that can change the truth of the movement.....or the glaring intent of their leadership.

watching sarah palin, in a clip this morning, in her black leather jacket...brandishing, mocking, insolent, disrespectful... talking about b.s....it seems hideous, in the light of the tragedy that has occurred.
this is what an abuse of the rights of free speech lead to....this is what happens when free speech turns into hate speech.
this is what happens when reckless, irresponsible and malevolent people become cult figures in any country.
now, people will see the truth of what that movement is about. its roots are in chaos and hatred, and so grows their tree.
they can scurry about, cleansing their words, and revising them, but that is futile, now.




Posted by: jkaren | January 10, 2011 1:40 PM | Report abuse

"There's little to no evidence that Loughner was remotely right wing, that he listened to Fox or liked Palin, or that he was even conservative. "

Totally agree, but the defensiveness of the right about their rhetoric is a little overboard (see that Malkin link above...). There's a ton of circumstantial evidence that needs to be commented on and discussed, because it's plausible and predictable that some crazy would be affected by all the violent rhetoric on the right.

Even though it's plausible though, it's totally, not-even-close to being proven.

Posted by: Chris_ | January 10, 2011 1:41 PM | Report abuse

JF11 is, of course, lying above. There's no evidence of JL's TV habits, and the link to AmRen is bogus:

http://24ahead.com/n/10308

Even the WaPo is somewhat correcting the record on the bogus AmRen story, see the link.

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | January 10, 2011 1:46 PM | Report abuse

"If you can derive anything at all from his youTube page, or the statements of his friends, the closest political label would probably be anarchist. He sounds a lot like any of the grunge anarchist potheads you will find living downtown in urban hipster communities. They also share a lot of belief in conspiracy theories. "


Yep. He actually bears a lot of resemblence in that regard to Leon Czolgosz in that regard.

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 1:48 PM | Report abuse

"If you can derive anything at all from his youTube page, or the statements of his friends, the closest political label would probably be anarchist. He sounds a lot like any of the grunge anarchist potheads you will find living downtown in urban hipster communities. They also share a lot of belief in conspiracy theories. "


Yep. He actually bears a lot of resemblence in that regard to Leon Czolgosz in that regard.

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Czolgosz believed there was a great injustice in American society, an inequality which allowed the wealthy to enrich themselves by exploiting the poor. He concluded that the reason for this was the structure of government itself. Then he learned of a European crime which changed his life: On July 29, 1900, King Umberto I of Italy had been shot dead by anarchist Gaetano Bresci. Bresci told the press that he had decided to take matters into his own hands for the sake of the common man.


Wow. That guy kind of sounds like today's redistributionist.

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 1:50 PM | Report abuse

This "post" by Ezra Klein was nothing more than what Shakespeare once wrote " a tale
told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
signifying nothing." There are no facts, just hearsay. What was the reason - who knows - but this "report" really shares nothing and should NOT be posted....

Posted by: jgdonahue | January 10, 2011 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Emma Goldman incurred a great deal of negative publicity when she published an article in which she compared Czolgosz to Marcus Junius Brutus, the killer of Julius Caesar, and called McKinley the "president of the money kings and trust magnates."[


Oh and this lady sounds like today's feminist describing President George W. Bush.

Posted by: krazen1211 | January 10, 2011 1:56 PM | Report abuse

From the comments here, it seems that people think that everyone in the world operates in some kind of vacuum.

No, there is no evidence this person listen to Faux or any Right Wing talk, but I try to avoid it, and I cannot.

Maybe the Tea Parties and Sarah did not mean to promote violence, but constantly skirting at the edges of it cannot be perceived as promoting peace.

Maybe the left does try to defend itself with similar tough talk, but all that does is raise the level.

Having said that, I try to be aware of what is going on, but I do not hear very much militant talk on the left. Very little, quite muted, and from very minor figures.

Posted by: grat_is | January 10, 2011 2:09 PM | Report abuse

C'mon....Limbaugh must have been playing in their car or something. How am I supposed to blame talk radio or Fox News now if Ezra keeps unearthing facts like this?

Posted by: souldeep64 | January 10, 2011 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Look, Loughner attended a Giffords' event in 2007, became unreasonably annoyed by Giffords' sensible reaction to his bizare off point question, and started a unilateral feud against Giffords.

Note, that none of us had ever heard of Palin until August of 2008 when she was given the VP slot on the Republican ticket by McCain.

3 days ago, Loughner posted on the Daily Kos, "My CongressWOMAN is dead to me.." because Giffords had voted against Pelosi for Speaker last week.

A person who had known Loughner in high school and in college describes him as a leftwing pothead, with very liberal ideas.

To suggest that this insane young man was a fan of responding to Palin is absurd and illogical.

If I were forced to guess, in addition to his obvious insanity, I would suggest that Loughner's actions on Saturday resulted from way too many violent video games, where the "hero" kills the "enemy" and the terrible violence in too many of the movies that our young people see.

Posted by: NoMoreLiberals | January 10, 2011 2:22 PM | Report abuse

^^ Conservatives keep posting this, but he did not post at DailyKos. Here's that user's comments since the attack:
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2011/1/7/12144/49456/6#c6

Posted by: Chris_ | January 10, 2011 2:26 PM | Report abuse

NoMoreLiberals:
"To suggest that this insane young man was a fan of responding to Palin is absurd and illogical."

That may be true, but when did logic ever form the basis for liberal-progressive arguments?

Posted by: dbw1 | January 10, 2011 2:41 PM | Report abuse

While I realize headline writers are often editors, if Ezra wrote this headline perhaps he (or the editor) belongs over at the National Enquirer. The Post has degenerated into worse than a tabloid.

Posted by: lavistabb | January 10, 2011 2:51 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Palin was to blame at all.

But I think this incident showed her true colors.

Question: How do you respond to controversy that a site wherein you put someone in the crosshairs has been linked to an actual incident of violence against said person?

Do you A) Address the question openly, expressing how they are unrelated?

Or B) Rush to remove said map from website minutes after the incident, have aides call the crosshair a survey mark, despite it being directly alluded to as a crosshair in the past, and have workers scrub 20,000+ comments of your facebook post as they appear?

Which do you think is the hallmark for a future leader?

Her handling of what may have been an unfair situation has found her sadly shallow and lacking in this voters eyes.

Posted by: spynnal | January 10, 2011 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Palin was to blame at all.

But I think this incident showed her true colors.

Question: How do you respond to controversy that a site wherein you put someone in the crosshairs has been linked to an actual incident of violence against said person?

Do you A) Address the question openly, expressing how they are unrelated?

Or B) Rush to remove said map from website minutes after the incident, have aides call the crosshair a survey mark, despite it being directly alluded to as a crosshair in the past, and have workers scrub 20,000+ comments of your facebook post as they appear?

Which do you think is the hallmark for a future leader?

Her handling of what may have been an unfair situation has found her sadly shallow and lacking in this voters eyes.

Posted by: spynnal | January 10, 2011 3:46 PM | Report abuse

A number of liberal politicians, columnists and bloggers have been predicting some kind of Tea Party violence to occur over the past year.

I think that goes a long way to explain why the left responded so quickly to the Arizona attack to smear the Tea Party. The left was just itching, waiting for something. They couldn't wait to smear conservatives. They wanted the negative attention off Pelosi and the left. Democratic strategist Mark Penn recently suggested it was necessary to save Obama's political career. A forerunner to this were the gun shots at congressional campaign offices until it was discovered it targeted politicians of all stripes.

So, like once suggested on the Journo-List they created a false rumor and they all rushed to their keyboards to smear the Tea Party within hours of the attack.

Unfortunately within hours details of the case started creeping out and started to unravel their narrative. The suspect was more liberal and leftist than first presented. The second suspect was a taxi driver. The way he got the gun was legitimate. He appeared to have unaddressed mental issues that does not respond to political rhetoric rationally or anywhere close to one could even imagine.

Then other news agencies dismissed the narrative and started doing real news research. It now appears that what set Loughner off was what most would consider a non-event. Giffords did not answer his non-political, non-sensical question with the sincerity he demanded.

Loughner was not a gullible political pawn, easily led astray - the mentally unstable are not mentally incapable - he was a deeply disturbed individual in which something non-significant and non-political set him off.

So, sure, ratchet down the aggressive political talk. But do so for respect for others, not to protect the gullible and disturbed. Fact is that Loughner operated on an entire other wave length than the rest of us.

Posted by: cprferry | January 10, 2011 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Actually I'm not sure what I find more disturbing - the political opportunism to smear the tea party movement or the rush to paint government criticism in bad light. I don't think any of us - left, right, middle, even the rare socialist, monarchist or fascist - want to see excising our democratic rights to be stigmatized.

Posted by: cprferry | January 10, 2011 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the "From WashMonthly" comment from AZProgressive.

It's not about the left or the right and the only reason the TeaParty is tied to this event is a direct result of their own poor judgment in inappropriate and incessant use of graphics and language meant to evoke imagery of using guns against ones opponents to achieve victory - and doing so more noticably than any other group. The TeaParty, according to that comment/repost, professes to "condemn hateful" rhetoric, yet uses it in its efforts almost to the point of being a standard operating procedure.

There are politicians and political group leaders, on all sides, who seem to view the use of violent double entendre to market their agenda as clever, but it's a dangerous game that is not in the best interests of the nation. That any politician could hold an event to shoot M16's to get a politician out of office is shameful. They had a chance to say "come out and support my candidacy and enjoy an opportunity to shoot a M16 for free", but they very specifically chose language that would evoke imagery of using the M16 against the opposition. It's not just unprofessional, it is beyond the pale of decency.

Like the TeaParty, Sarah Palin is also getting backlash for her actions that directly tied to Gifford. How would she have felt if Dancing With The Stars fan groups had posted a map with crosshairs over the hometowns of contestants they wanted ousted from the show. Or held events in which people could shoot guns to get someone off the show - so to speak. I'm certain she would have viewed her actions and of those she supported in Tucson a bit differently. But somehow in politics it's OK to say things you don't really mean... and isn't that a big problem with politics? Not being able to take a politician or political groups at their word? They can say anything these days, because we're all supposed assume they don't mean any of it.

Ultimately, regardless of which party any political figure prefers, their goal is to be a leader of all the citizens of their district/state/nation and as such they need to do what's right and act in a responsible manner as role models - leaders who can win a debate through fact and common sense without having to resort to cutesy, mindless, thoughtless and too often - violent rhetoric to get people to listen to them.

Posted by: pgs70 | January 10, 2011 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Myself and others here have suggested we have a current problem with right-wing violence and rhetoric, especially in recent decades.

I have seen no compelling refutation anywhere in these blog comments to counter the above concern.

- Yes, liberals have been violent, but not with the frequency of right-wingers.

- Reagan's shooter: There is no evidence John Hinkley is a liberal. He is supposedly a deranged individual who shot reagan in order to impress Jody Foster. Further, his father is supposedly a financial backer of BushSr against Reagan in theri earlier campaign.

- There have been 100s (perhaps 1000s) of American deaths since 1992 at the hands of right-wing provocateurs. Tim McVeigh's OK city bombing, planes flown into IRS offices, Holocaust Museum shooting, Pentagon Guard shooting, Abortion doctor assassination, The Giffard-related deaths, Knoxville Unitarian Church murders by a Michael Savage devotee, many gay hate murders across the country, ...

- Liberals don't have militias. Some anti-gvmt militia members were arrested this year in Michigan plotting to bomb police stations. Militias are composed almost entirely of angry conservatives who hate the gvmt and all Democrats, and every time a Republican like Sarah Palin or John McCain puts Democrats in hit lists or talks of aiming or reloading or second amendment remedies, they are helping to make 1000s of anry militia members even more angry. When such events as Tim McVeigh are fresh in our memory, it is unconscienable for people like Palin to use the kind of rhetoric she uses.

- Liberals aren't hitler loving skin-heads. Again, they are almost always conservative. And ask any police chief in the country whether they have violence problems with nazi skin-heads.

- A Beck devotee was arrested planning to attack the Tides Foundation after Beck broadcast lies and lamentatins about it.

- Several Dems on Palins hit list received death threats after being put on it, and as we know, one of them was actually shot.

- msoja's link of supposed liberal hate is a joke. Don't show me ugly progressives, show me lists of people killed by progressives. Show me hit lists that liberal politicians have created. Show me liberal news people joking about bombing the NYtimes or calling Bush a racist. Show me liberal politician statements joking about killing Republicans.

- Don't you dare to respond to me unless you can PROVE liberals are killing people out of ideological hatred or purity. Don't you dare tell me I am spreading hate or call me a kook because I have detailed info regarding right-wing violence and rhetoric.

- You respond to me, you prove your case.

- Just report the facts. How many people died or were arrested and by who.

- If I had the resources, I'd show you a chart of right-wing vs left-wing violence that would illustrate just how many people have died or been hurt or threatened by the right-wing. Prove me wrong with credible links or analysis, not personal crap like.

Posted by: lauren2010 | January 11, 2011 7:17 AM | Report abuse

Lauren is of course correct. Even in right wing officially sanctioned political ads there were "targets", a "hit list" to "take them out".

Lonewacko is of course wrong. Initial reports listed right wing and extremist publications found at his home. He was fixated on "making government smaller", so to speak. He was politically motivated.

By the way "leave this long haired pot smoking country boy alone" is right wing.

Posted by: JF11 | January 11, 2011 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Lauren2010,

It's difficult to determine where to tally up all these events. It's hard to tell where the extreme right ends and extreme left begins in their political fantasies and modern frustrations. It almost seems that both extremes hate all of us in the middle, from the progressive liberal to the libertarian conservative.

Posted by: cprferry | January 11, 2011 1:05 PM | Report abuse

CPR

Your reply is inadequate to even begin to make your point or repudiate mine.

Details please

Show me where American liberals are killing or threatening in the degree right wingers are

You people need to stop denying your fantasies that liberals are anywhere near as dangerous as the right

Posted by: lauren2010 | January 11, 2011 2:07 PM | Report abuse

I hope none of us who choose to comment to a blog that address political matters hold any fantasies of one side or the other being more dangerous.

Alas within hours of each and every attack, even alleged attack, at least one side has rushed to smear the other.

Posted by: cprferry | January 11, 2011 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like you are worried more about the provocateurs and attackers being smeared than what happened to the victims.

Perhaps if certain people got smeared a little more and a little sooner, certain others wouldn't have gotten shot.

Posted by: lauren2010 | January 11, 2011 4:18 PM | Report abuse

lauren2010, get your facts straight, and don't tell us how we have to respond to you. You have posted what are mostly lies. You say we are not to respond to you unless we can prove liberals are killing out of "ideological purity"-- what a strawman argument. Purity ? Like Hitler ? Or Mao or Pol Pot ? (But they were not American leftists, so they don't count. Lucky for us, I guess) You post liberal nonsense-- you get my response:

Please identify which conservative flew a plane into an IRS building. The only one (Andrew Stack) in recent memory was by a nut who hated Bush, big business and banks. He was nuts, not conservative.

Stop lying about skinheads being part of the conservative movement. There is no legitimate connection. They are not conservatives-- they are vile, disgusting punks who do not represent any part of the conservative movement, except the part that liberals invent.

Glenn Beck is not telling lies about the Tides Foundation. If you have evidence-- PROOF-- you are welcome to present it. You won't, because you can't. Beck presents his evidence every day on his show. As does Limbaugh. Most of their evidence is just video or audio of the words of the liberal fool. And it is in context. You will lose this argument unless you take something they say out of context, a favorite tactic of Media Matters and almost all liberals.

But this is the statement that proves that your character:

"Several Dems on Palins hit list received death threats after being put on it, and as we know, one of them was actually shot."

Every politician gets death threats. Everybody in the public spotlight gets death threats-- all the time. There are lots of nuts in this country, left and right. Not a shred of evidence this nut paid any attention to Palin, or saw her website. And even if he did, it is a lie to suggest Palin was hinting at killing.

Have you ever heard of ELF ? Do you recall the SDS and Weather Underground ? Bill Ayers and his terrorist wife ? People died because of their actions. That is the left-- punk terrorists who run and hide after they maim and kill. Maybe that is why we don't have all of the names-- except the names of the dead.

There was no "hit list". That term implies that somebody created a list of people to kill. That is just a vile suggestion. Do you think that we have not had endless political campaigns using fighting or combat references from the left ? Have you seen the list compiled of Obama's comments, such as "They bring a knife, you bring a gun", "Get in their faces", and about punishing enemies ? The President-- talking about punishing Americans who disagree with him...How is that peaceful ?

But liberals also are in favor of killing millions of unborn-- the truly defenseless. So save your self-righteousness for somebody who visits from another planet, since they are the only ones likely to believe it.

Posted by: noliberalfool | January 11, 2011 9:10 PM | Report abuse

"Sounds like you are worried more about the provocateurs and attackers being smeared than what happened to the victims.
Posted by: lauren2010"

On that I do happen to have great worry about this Loughner guy. And his family. From what we've found out (not what we hoped would be and blogged about within a hour of the attack) is that this guy was seriously troubled and had distanced himself from reality and his family.

Some are now out there claiming the mentally unstable as easily led astray by extreme political rhetoric. But that assumes the unstable are mentally impaired or gullible. Hardly. Certainly not the schizophrenic. If the schizophrenic could be manipulated as some suggest I'm sure families and mental health professionals would have less headaches. But they aren't, they respond in ways we couldn't even expect. They respond irrationally. It's not a case of misunderstanding context - i.e, that crosshairs mean targeting with a pistol not with votes - it's a case of any input being twisted into something entirely irrational.

What we have here is a misunderstanding of a mental illness. And an absolution of responsibility to help and report it. The community college, the parents, the liberal-spewing sheriff all were aware of Loughner's behavior. So too many classmates and neighbors. His friends now admit they were worried. Yet not one sought help for him.

I think that's the real story here. While political opportunists run around to take advantage to smear others or pass gun legislation or insulate/protect politicians or expand mental health funding or some kind of macro approach. The real story should be the neglect of our neighbor.

Posted by: cprferry | January 11, 2011 11:37 PM | Report abuse

Skinheads are rightwing nuts. Period.

The plane was flown into IRS offices because he was taught to hate gvmt and taxes. Conservatives taught him that.

Palin did have a hit list. Dont rewrite history.

There are indeed leftist idiots too, as I said. But that was a problem long ago, not recent. Let's concentrate what we have now: rightwing violence pervades our society and their GOP leaders reflect willingness to use venomous rhetoric unmatched.

So again, I've outlined 100s deaths by the RR. I'm still waiting for comparable stats showing liberals are as violent.

Posted by: lauren2010 | January 12, 2011 8:05 AM | Report abuse

Cpm

The liberal spewing sheriff is actually quite conservative.

Many of us have long been worried about how mentally handicapped people are cared for in the system, but the rule of law dictates limitations, which usually are present because of obstructionism by those who oppose gvmt action.

Your sympathy for the shooter is helping you to maintain your denial of the RR violence machine. In a few days you'll go back to ignoring the plight of the less fortunate and leave the rest of us to wonder when things will change so we can perhaps have a chance to help people like loughner before they become murderers.

Posted by: lauren2010 | January 12, 2011 9:11 AM | Report abuse

I could care less about smearing either the LW or RW. I would hope you would too. It serves little purpose.

If you truly care about a compassionate society, one that looks to self to help your neighbor, rather than just leave them to the system, I urge you to reconsider the Tea Party movement. Far from the hate mongering sect some believe they're out there volunteering and supporting their neighbors. Looking for social changes, not bureaucratic answers.

Posted by: cprferry | January 12, 2011 2:12 PM | Report abuse

The TP is about electing the kind of people who encourage people to shoot abortion drs and Democrats.

Their policies will lead to more debt and more guns.

Posted by: lauren2010 | January 12, 2011 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Recently Rush Limbaugh stated that the "Democrat Party" was 100% behind Loughner. Rush is a key Republican/conservative information source. Ezra Klein is a political "Liberal" commentator who is implying that the shooting was potentially due to the mean spirited rhetoric of the Conservatives. I thought I'd ask a question to both Limbaugh and Klein and anyone who'd like to guess at the answer.

Here's the question:

In a recent audio audio Limbaugh attempts to link Loughner to "a major political party in this country", "the Democrat Party."

Can you give me the date of the founding of "that major political party", the "Democrat Party and, second, can you name 5 current members of the "Democrat Party?"

I look forward to the responses.

Posted by: JedG | January 12, 2011 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company