Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 4:35 PM ET, 01/ 9/2011

On the Gabrielle Giffords shooting

By Greg Sargent

It's crass and counterproductive to start asking whether any political parties or ideologies are to blame for the tragic and horrific shooting of Dem Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others at an event with constituents yesterday. That's especially true given that the shooter is looking more and more like a deranged loner and early chatter that he might have had an accomplice is turning out to be false.

But it's fair to ask lawmakers and commentators to use this tragedy as a jumping off point for some serious reflection about what has become of our political discourse. Even if there's no clear connection between the shooting and the incendiary political rhetoric that has now become perilously close to the norm in American politics, that doesn't mean the shooting can't serve as a reminder to those who are inclined towards over-the-top rhetoric that words matter and risk having consequences that are somewhat more important than whether they earn their purveyors cable and Internet play.

As a number of folks have argued persuasively today, even if we don't know whether the shooter's motives have anything to do with the tone of our politics, that doesn't mean we can't use the shooting to call for more introspection and self-restraint from those who flirt with violent rhetoric or paint their opponents as treasonous and anti-American.

I'd like to take this one step further, though. I hope the shooting is also a gut-check moment of sorts for lawmakers and commentators who wouldn't dream of trafficking in such rhetoric themselves but tend to just dismiss it as "part of the game." I'm talking about those who shower uncritical media and Internet attention on purveyors of hateful rhetoric because it gets "clicks" and "eyeballs"; those who look the other way when colleagues indulge in it; and those who scoff at criticism of such rhetoric as motivated by nothing but "partisanship."

Many of us are far more guilty than we'd like to admit of helping to "mainstream" quasi-violent and out-of-bounds rhetoric. And I hope the shooting will get folks who aren't themselves prone to sinking to such depths to be a bit more determined to call it out as unacceptable when we see it in others.

By Greg Sargent  | January 9, 2011; 4:35 PM ET
Categories:  House Dems, Political media  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sunday Open Thread
Next: The Morning Plum

Comments

Nice piece, Greg.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 4:40 PM | Report abuse

I think the appropriate response is what Jeremiah Wright called for after the 9/11 attacks. It's a time for self-evaluation, quiet reflection, and cleaning house internally. This is not a time for paybacks, or to point fingers, or to pretend we're without flaws or faults or responsibility.

Tomorrow's White House directed moment of silence at 11 AM Eastern is probably the most appropriate thing for all of us.

Posted by: benintn | January 9, 2011 4:43 PM | Report abuse

I'd just like to say I think yesterday's shooting was particularly horrendous in the scheme of these things. I have a friend who's a close adviser to Gabrielle Giffords and is friends with others who were killed or wounded. He told me that, in his circle, which is wide, he doesn't know anyone who wasn't personally affected by the shooting. When a gunman in a few seconds can shoot a person elected to federal office, political staff members and volunteers, constituents who are in the process of meeting with the person who represents them, and even a child who is interested in how government works, the chilling effect is extraordinary and bigger than the sum of the parts. And so, yes, the rhetoric that may help to incite violence of this kind in people who are unbalanced really needs to be confronted by citizens and elected officials of both parties. Its threat to democracy is real.

Posted by: AllButCertain | January 9, 2011 4:44 PM | Report abuse

"And I hope the shooting will get folks who aren't themselves prone to sinking to such depths to be a bit more determined to call it out as unacceptable when we see it in others."

It has to start somewhere, might as well be here. You have a lot of smart commenters here from various professions and the whole spectrum of political persuasion so maybe there's hope for us. Many of us have become cyber friends even though we disagree so we'll see. I'm not prone to personally calling people out for over the top rhetoric but I can at least try to refrain from it myself.

It's going to be a tough run up to the election and there's lots of economic grief across the country as well as real structural problems to solve, maybe it's time for a little more elbow grease and a little less ideology.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 9, 2011 4:56 PM | Report abuse

It is not crass to look at political motives and consider whether the hateful political rhetoric may have had a disastrous effect on an unbalanced individual.

As AllButCertain said,
"And so, yes, the rhetoric that may help to incite violence of this kind in people who are unbalanced really needs to be confronted by citizens and elected officials of both parties. Its threat to democracy is real."

Sometimes pointing fingers is needed, to stop dangerous conduct.

Posted by: jgwlaw | January 9, 2011 5:07 PM | Report abuse

From the FBI Affidavit:

"LOUGHNER was apprehended at the scene after bystanders tackled and disarmed him. At the scene, law enforcement recovered the handgun used by LOUGHNER, a Glock semi-automatic pistol. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has determined that LOUGHNER purchased the Glock pistol, serial number PWL 699, on or about November 30, 2010, from Sportsman's Warehouse in Tucson. In addition to the investigation conducted by ATF, LOUGHNER's purchase of the weapon was corroborated by store receipts and video, among other evidence.
5) On January 8, 2011, a search warrant was executed at 7741 N. Soledad Avenue in Tucson Arizona, where LOUGHNER resides. Some of the evidence seized from that location included a letter in a safe, addressed to "Mr. Jared Loughney" [sic] at 7741 N. Soledad Avenue, from Congresswoman Giffords, on Congressional stationary, dated August 30, 2007, thanking him for attending a "Congress on your Corner" event at the Foothills Mall in Tucson. Also recovered in the safe was an envelope with handwriting on the envelope stating "I planned ahead" and My assassination" and the name "Giffords," along with what appears to be LOUGHNER's signature."

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/justice/statement-of-probable-cause-filed-in-phoenix-against-loughner-01092011

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Greg:

" And I hope the shooting will get folks who aren't themselves prone to sinking to such depths to be a bit more determined to call it out as unacceptable when we see it in others."

Hear, hear.

I look forward to you calling out some of the offending comments right here, particularly those which come from voices which tend to share your political views. It's something you've proven reluctant to do in the past, and a change in attitude would be welcome. Perhaps you would like to start by commenting on cao, who has said that conservatives should be gassed.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 9, 2011 5:20 PM | Report abuse

"Sometimes pointing fingers is needed, to stop dangerous conduct."

In fact, dangerous conduct cannot be stopped until it is openly identified. If we are afraid to name it, we're unable to address it. It is Right Wing Extremism that has gone mainstream.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Whether or not this shooter was incited by anyone, or whether he was listening to voices in his head, we do not know. But, the Sunday talk shows and the newspapers are running pieces about the degeneration of civil discourse and the use of inflammatory rhetoric. And that is a good thing, because *most* of us know that the buildup of guns and ammo and over-the-top rhetoric by pols and commentators, in the last couple of years, could set the stage for disastrous consequences.

In a way, this reminds me of the assassination of Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King when, finally, we were all shocked about the violent forces in our country. In the case of Kennedy, it's not clear to me that his shooter was anyone but a madman, but still, the proximity of these killings, following a few years after Jack Kennedy's assassination, shook us out of our complacency.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 5:24 PM | Report abuse

You might want to start by calling out Sheriff Dupnick. He started yesterday.

Apparently he just made outrageous statements on (the dreaded) Fox condemning Republicans and saying that "one party is trying to block the other from making this country better," or words close to that. I unfortunately missed it but can't wait to hear a replay.

Last year he was calling AZ 170 racist and prejudiced, joining with Obama and Holder in attacking its authors and Gov. Brewer.

Now he's effectively accusing the GOP of being anti-American, treasonous, and murderous.

So let's hear it. Condemn his comments.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 5:26 PM | Report abuse

"*most* of us know that the buildup of guns and ammo and over-the-top rhetoric by pols and commentators, in the last couple of years, could set the stage for disastrous consequences."

Unfortunately, a fair number of us still deny it. Even after this.

"In a way, this reminds me of the assassination of Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King when, finally, we were all shocked about the violent forces in our country. In the case of Kennedy, it's not clear to me that his shooter was anyone but a madman, but still, the proximity of these killings, following a few years after Jack Kennedy's assassination, shook us out of our complacency."

And the Right Wing took over. And here we are.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 5:33 PM | Report abuse

And the Right Wing took over. And here we are.
-----------------------------------
@wbg,

I was trying to remember what happened after 1968 in terms of gun control. Maybe nothing. I just remember myself being shocked for the first time in my young life that our political leaders were being shot, just for their views.

I suppose what you're talking about is the rise of Richard Nixon and his law and order agenda. What else?

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 5:39 PM | Report abuse

@Greg

Agree with your take.

This entire incident contains so many issues and so much to be sad about.

Of course we all share in the suffering of the families affected...truly a horrible tragedy.

As for the tragedy for our country...can anyone here say they were shocked when they heard the news? Or was it expected?
Honestly? Am I the only one disturbed by the answer from the Sheriff on the question of whether Giffords had received any prior threats. The Sheriff looked at the reporter quizzically and replied..virtually all public officials get NUMEROUS death threats, and we know this to be especially true of our national politicians.

Lost in all these arguments of false equivalency is the fact that we still have trouble addressing the obvious. I can't put my finger on it...it's certainly not all Republicans...but it's sad to me that Republicans willing to admit our problem can't really address it for fear of retaliation....

A senior Republican senator, speaking anonymously in order to freely discuss the tragedy, told POLITICO that the Giffords shooting should be taken as a “cautionary tale” by Republicans.

“There is a need for some reflection here - what is too far now?” said the senator. “What was too far when Oklahoma City happened is accepted now. There’s been a desensitizing. These town halls and cable TV and talk radio, everybody’s trying to outdo each other.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47294.html#ixzz1AZzpja2K


Again as a child of the 60's this is so much deja vu. A stupid non productive war claiming lives, treasure, and some would say our spot on the moral high ground. A summer of demonstrations in 09...folks carrying around loaded firearms at political events...flying planes into IRS buildings. I hope the R party finds itself. I believe we truly need the R's to be a viable opposition party. I know we want the R's to be competent and successful when it's their turn at the wheel. All this white hot rhetoric and some of those willing to sell their souls and say whatever it takes to get elected are not good for the R party.

The 2012 R Convention happens to be across the bay from me in Tampa. 2 years is a lifetime in politics...but if something doesn't change..the R's are liable to find themselves in the same position as the Dems in '68. How did that quest for ideological purity and tangential violence work for the Dems? The Dems did have one advantage in 68 we no longer have...the kids who were protesting in Chicago were largely unarmed...if those on the fringe of the right show up in Tampa angry...they'll be well armed and feel entitled to water the tree of liberty.
Good luck R's. Hopefully this all resolves itself before then.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 5:42 PM | Report abuse

A senior Republican senator, speaking anonymously in order to freely discuss the tragedy, told POLITICO that the Giffords shooting should be taken as a “cautionary tale” by Republicans.

“There is a need for some reflection here - what is too far now?” said the senator. “What was too far when Oklahoma City happened is accepted now. There’s been a desensitizing. These town halls and cable TV and talk radio, everybody’s trying to outdo each other.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47294.html#ixzz1AZzpja2K
-------------------------------------------------------
A *senior* senator has to speak anonymously?

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 5:47 PM | Report abuse

"And the Right Wing took over. And here we are"

So, let's see:

A communist shot JFK
A palestinian shot RFK
J.E. Ray shot MLK
Manson family member Fromme shoots at republican president Ford.
Hinckley shoots republican president Reagan.

I'm not getting a connection to right wing assassins out of this.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 5:49 PM | Report abuse

@12BAR

Glad to see you're still here and RFR hasn't found a way to get you banned. :-)

You said..."A *senior* senator has to speak anonymously?"

Exactly!

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 5:52 PM | Report abuse

More from that anonymous senior Republican senator:

“They’re talking about things most mainstream Americans are talking about, like spending and debt,” the Republican said, before adding that politicians of all stripes need to emphasize in the coming days that “tone matters.”

“And the Republican Party in particular needs to reinforce that,” the senator said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47294.html#ixzz1Aa66ikn2
---------------------------------------------
Has to speak *anonymously*. That stuns me. Forget about Jared Loughner. It's a senior senator who have to hide his name.

I'd love to know the name of this senator.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 5:54 PM | Report abuse

ruk,

So you are, despite having found more balance, unable to see this as more than a cautionary tale for Republicans, and unable to see the "rhetoric" issue as more than a Republican issue.

So let's keep this simple. How does that explain the Florida school board shooter?

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 5:54 PM | Report abuse

12BB:

Just that the Right Wing has been in control for 40 years now and the country has gone to hell by just about every measure.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Glad to see you're still here and RFR hasn't found a way to get you banned. :-)
-------------------------------------------
He tries though. Makes me feel kinda good actually. Gives him another cause in life besides getting Obama to get down on his knees and obediently resign.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 5:57 PM | Report abuse

"A *senior* senator has to speak anonymously?"

We call that "leadership".

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 6:00 PM | Report abuse

"Just that the Right Wing has been in control for 40 years now and the country has gone to hell by just about every measure."

Clearly one of the more delusional statements ever made on PL. But then Barack Obama is right wing to you. Seriously, you've lost touch with reality. Thank goodness you represent about 10% of the country at most.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 6:01 PM | Report abuse

"Right Wing has been in control for 40 years now"

40 years takes us back to 1970, see if any of these ring a bell:

President Carter
President Clinton
Democrat majorities in the House and Senate during Bush I, Reagan, and much of Bush II's terms holding numerous oversight hearings.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 6:03 PM | Report abuse

"A senior senator has to speak anonymously?"

We call that "leadership".
----------------------------------------------------
Yeah, leadership. The leader who has to wear a brown bag over his head so his base or contributors don't recognize him.

Of everything said yesterday and today about this shooting, the fact that a *senior* Republican senator has to speak anonymously is the most stunning. That confirms more than anything the power of the pro-violence speakers.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 6:06 PM | Report abuse

"Of everything said yesterday and today about this shooting, the fact that a *senior* Republican senator has to speak anonymously is the most stunning. That confirms more than anything the power of the pro-violence speakers."

They've gone nuts. No question about it.

O&O.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 6:16 PM | Report abuse

For RUK:

*The eastern world, it is exploding
Violence flarin', bullets loadin'
You're old enough to kill, but not for votin'
You don't believe in war, but what's that gun you're totin'
And even the Jordan River has bodies floatin'

But you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don't believe
We're on the eve
of destruction.

Don't you understand what I'm tryin' to say
Can't you feel the fears I'm feelin' today?
If the button is pushed, there's no runnin' away
There'll be no one to save, with the world in a grave
[Take a look around ya boy, it's bound to scare ya boy]

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don't believe
We're on the eve
of destruction.

Yeah, my blood's so mad feels like coagulatin'
I'm sitting here just contemplatin'
I can't twist the truth, it knows no regulation.
Handful of senators don't pass legislation
And marches alone can't bring integration
When human respect is disintegratin'
This whole crazy world is just too frustratin'

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don't believe
We're on the eve
of destruction.

Think of all the hate there is in Red China
Then take a look around to Selma, Alabama
You may leave here for 4 days in space
But when you return, it's the same old place
The poundin' of the drums, the pride and disgrace
You can bury your dead, but don't leave a trace
Hate your next-door neighbor, but don't forget to say grace
And… tell me over and over and over and over again, my friend
You don't believe
We're on the eve
Of destruction
Mm, no no, you don't believe
We're on the eve
of destruction.*

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 9, 2011 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Meanwhile the shooter yesterday is a fan of flag-burning.
Lists the Communist Manifesto as a favorite book.
Is described by college classmates as a radical leftist.
Has a letter from the Giffords campaign from 2007 found in his safe today... and the left blames Palin and the Tea Parties movement which started last year for this shooting. Brilliant.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 6:21 PM | Report abuse

After 24 hours of watching this insanity, it's probably best to just call a spade a spade.

Paranoid schizophrenic shoots 20. There's not a shred of evidence he was any kind of conservative at any time or was influenced by any conservative rhetoric. There's solid evidence he was a leftist before his psychotic break, and he shot a blue dog Dem who was targetted by leftists for political retribution.

But hordes of leftists like wbgonne and good "Sheriff" Dupnik see it as self-evident that he was a Tea Partier triggered by conservative rhetoric. They are either insane themselves or without a bit of integrity, honor or principle.

It really doesn't matter all that much which it is. Either way, the extreme left is committed to destroying all opposition by whatever means are necessary. Just read all these posts by wbgonne, Ethan, 12bb, et al. They must be opposed with all the resolve that is possible, relentlessly, for as long as it takes, as strongly as is necessary. You will not destroy or defeat us. Ever.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 6:33 PM | Report abuse

2007 Letter from Giffords found in shooter's safe:
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2011/01/09/20110109gabrielle-giffords-arizona-shooting-suspect-letters-safe.html

Palin was an unknown Gov and the tea party movement was non-existant then.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 6:33 PM | Report abuse

HI! RUK

Long time, so glad to see your tag...Happy New Year, Squire.

{{{now back to football, talk 2U later}}}

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Q.B. "How does that explain the Florida school board shooter?"

It doesn't. The School Board shooter was angry because his wife had been fired. Recently a deranged lady calmly went into the Publix supermarket and shot her former supervisor after being fired. I think that is more comparable.

But we are going to waste more time here Q.B. jumping back and forth between general and specific issues.

Rather than disagree about something let's move to points of possible agreement. I'm hoping that both parties simply say..ENOUGH!!! It doesn't really matter about fault. We're going to wipe the slate clean and agree on some things as a nation.

And so Q.B. can you agree on a few things...

1.)Any call or even suggestion of violence by an elected politician or a candidate is completely and unequivocally unacceptable.

2.)In the future any politician of ANY party who looks toward "Second Amendment" solutions, or speaks of violence not being off the table or asks supporters to make an opponent afraid to come out of their house will immediately be viewed as the crackpot they are and no longer taken seriously.

3.)That the NRA could point out the difference between legally carrying firearms and carrying firearms in appropriate places. Bringing firearms to a political rally with signs suggesting violence such as "Watering the Tree of Liberty" or the tea party folks who hit the Capitol with signs of ""We came unarmed . . . this time." This is actually treasonous!!! A threat against the United States!
4.) That vacuous demagogues out to make a buck who say stuff like..."the commander-in-chief a "racist" with a "deep-seated hatred for white people." should be shunned off the air because our society was brighter and more civil than to deal with such insulting ignorance. Glenn Beck believes Obama has a deep seated hatred for half of himself as well as his mother and maternal grandparents who raised him.

Q.B. Lets move past all this name calling of the past...and agree guns and violence do not mix with politics, metaphorically or literally.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Let us consider, by the process of back formation, what a troll is.

Trolling is a method of fishing wherein a fisherman drags an artificial bait through the water in an attepmt to convince fish with very ossified mental processes that something edible is about to move out of range if the fish doesn't eat it RIGHT NOW.

Is one who trolls a troll?

Is one who trolls blogs a blog troll?
Greg suggests that we consider within ourselves what it is we might have done that adds to the atmosphere that lets deranged people to act in such a way as to go hunting for people to shoot. I have watched, and read until the drek that is crowding out discussion made me stop, the thoughts of posters on several columns. None seem to consider Greg's point. Their is little debate or discussion available in these pages any more, and it is becoming less, because those who try to find alternate ways to view problems are derided by those who have only one approach and care not about the possibility that that approach might be suboptimal. Now we have troll blocking software that permits those whose computers don't get fouled by the programs to simply exclude the more obnoxious posters from their universe.

That OUGHT to be a very anti discussion approach, but given the anti social behavior of some trolls, it is basically necessary.

So perhaps the first introspective look we each need take is to our own posts. What do each of us bring to the discussion that benefits the other readers, both those we agree with and those we don't. Reposts of the same unchanging can't block the development of positions some of us have. stubborn restatements of positions refuted because they are our positions ossifies the debate and drives away points of view that might benefit us all.

And loss of posters who post one or two times a week to the egos of posters who must own the blogs they determine to be theirs deprive all of us, eventually, of the platforms now available to post our thoughts.

I regularly get disgusted with WAPO forums because of the repetitive hate and bluster. I am less and less inclined to return.

And I am at least willing to make that point. Many just leave and never return.

Is that the political discourse you wanton these blogs?

Posted by: ceflynline | January 9, 2011 6:34 PM | Report abuse

"Apparently he just made outrageous statements on (the dreaded) Fox condemning Republicans and saying that "one party is trying to block the other from making this country better," or words close to that. I unfortunately missed it but can't wait to hear a replay......

So let's hear it. Condemn his comments."

Only if you provide a direct quote because I haven't been able to find that he's said anything as remotely partisan as you've claimed.....but I'm sure you'll be the first to apologize if you're wrong, right?

Posted by: schrodingerscat | January 9, 2011 6:38 PM | Report abuse

@tao...thanks for the welcome back. Ahhh football...your Gmen and my Bucs both won 10 and were left out of the playoffs...yeeccchhh. I guess I'm a Packers fan now.

@Mark Thanks....ahhh yes Barry McGuire and the Eve of Destruction.

Thats the part of the 60's that is missing this time. Not only has the violence and over the top rhetoric moved to the right from the left...but the musicians have sold us out as well....Don't get me wrong...I'm not a stereotypical old fogey...I do enjoy Katy Perry, Lady GaGa, Train and others but what happened to music with a social conscience?

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 6:43 PM | Report abuse

"Sometimes pointing fingers is needed, to stop dangerous conduct."

In fact, dangerous conduct cannot be stopped until it is openly identified. If we are afraid to name it, we're unable to address it. It is Right Wing Extremism that has gone mainstream.


Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 5:20 PM

-------

Completely unconscious.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

There is an organized SMEAR campaign going on this weekend - to smear Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.


The President of the United States is involved in this conspiracy to deceive the American People - the objective is to take the shooting in Arizona and use the incident to do political damage to Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

On this blog, we have already seen Ethan and Liam re-post democratic talking points which place this blame on Sarah Palin.

I find these actions to be anti-democratic and unAmerican.

Combined with Journo-list, which was an organized attempt to

1) not compete among news sources which should be competing.

2) present news sources as unbiased when, in fact, there was an organized email list dedicated to hiding information and slanting information going to the American Public.


I have a problem with these Obama tactics. I don't believe for one minute that Obama doesnt know this is going on and I dont doubt that Obama APPROVES of these tactics.

If someone under you, in an organization run by you, started an organized smear campaign against an American citizen, the person at the top has to know and approve.

Or that person at the top should be taking positive steps to stop this behavior -

Obama has NEVER stopped the false charges of racism.

Obama has never stopped the smear campaigns

Obama has never stopped the organized attempts to decieve the American people through biased reporting.

All this is out-of-bounds in my mind.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

There is an organized SMEAR campaign going on this weekend - to smear Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.


The President of the United States is involved in this conspiracy to deceive the American People - the objective is to take the shooting in Arizona and use the incident to do political damage to Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

On this blog, we have already seen Ethan and Liam re-post democratic talking points which place this blame on Sarah Palin.

I find these actions to be anti-democratic and unAmerican.

Combined with Journo-list, which was an organized attempt to

1) not compete among news sources which should be competing.

2) present news sources as unbiased when, in fact, there was an organized email list dedicated to hiding information and slanting information going to the American Public.


I have a problem with these Obama tactics. I don't believe for one minute that Obama doesnt know this is going on and I dont doubt that Obama APPROVES of these tactics.

If someone under you, in an organization run by you, started an organized smear campaign against an American citizen, the person at the top has to know and approve.

Or that person at the top should be taking positive steps to stop this behavior -

Obama has NEVER stopped the false charges of racism.

Obama has never stopped the smear campaigns

Obama has never stopped the organized attempts to decieve the American people through biased reporting.

All this is out-of-bounds in my mind.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

Add to ruk's list of things we could agree on:

5. That the NRA should take the leadership on preventing mentally ill persons from legally buying guns and get laws preventing this passed nationwide. This is best done by the NRA advocating responsible gun ownership.

If Loughner is psychotic, it applies to him. If he is not, it applies to other psychotics.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

of course I am. I guess I live in a tolerant area where these incidents do not take place.

Tim Russert called Obama out before the South Carolina primary on the false charges of racism.

Obama said he wouldn't do it anymore. Then the Obama people started to try to twist something Bill Clinton said and calling it racist.

Then there was the comment by Geraldine Ferraro, which Obama twisted out of context and tried to smear her by calling her a racist.

Then there were the phone called the Obama people were making to the SuperDelegates - threatening them with "riots in the streets" if Obama didn't get the nomination.

They proceeded to threaten the SuperDelegates saying that the blacks would leave the democratic party for good if Obama did not get the nomination.

All this is OUT OF BOUNDS in the American political system.

Then Obama made the famous comment that "they haven't said anything racist yet, but they will"


The whole atmosphere is one of WITCH HUNT AND INTIMIDATION.


We can't allow this guy to get away with this.


Then this summer, they tried to drum up the same garbage with the NAACP resolution.

They have been trying to call the Tea Party racist all along - trying to INTIMIDATE THEM INTO NOT ENGAGING IN AMERICAN POLITICS.

Obama's people have tried to make the Tea Party into the new KKK. Only no one has lynched anyone.


Obama has destroyed the political atmosphere in this country. Something has to be done - People should speak out against these tactics.


The truth is that the INTIMIDATION TACTIC OF THE KKK are now being used by the Obama people AGAINST THE TEA PARTY.

The Obama people are trying to intimidate the Tea Party into NOT participating in politics - just like the KKK did to the blacks at the beginning of Jim Crow.


Seriously man - the Obama people are the new KKK.

I know we are trying to have a serious conversation - but I believe these issues are important.

At a minimum the Obama people are acting like the Nixon people.

These issues are important and should be addressed.


These tactics have NO PLACE in Obama - Obama should have to answer for these things. Obama has done NOTHING to stop any of it, so Obama is RESPONSIBLE.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 6:46 PM | Report abuse

And the Right Wing took over. And here we are.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 5:33 PM

-------

I suppose you forgot the assassination attempts directed at Reagan and Ford. How convenient.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 6:47 PM | Report abuse

There is NO REASON why Obama and his people should turn this shooting into an opportunity for a smear campaign against American citizens


Again, this has to be an impeachable offense.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 6:48 PM | Report abuse

I am completely with Shrink2 on the "wingedness" issue - schizophrenics may think they have wings but they are not supplied by left or right. It is wrongheaded to connect this to anyone else in advance of facts, and QB1 is right to ask about the FL shooter of anyone who tries to make the connection from the evidence available, which is none.
----------------------------------------------
That does not take violent rhetoric "off the hook". I am one who does not find crosshairs more disturbing than bullseye targets - so what? Obviously, many of you do. Sensitivity noted. For me Angle's statement did cross the line.

So do these:

June 24, 2009-Hal Turner, a New Jersey resident and white supremacist blogger/radio host, is arrested again after calling for the murder of three Republican-appointed jurists on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals who had issued a June 2 decision upholding handgun restrictions in Chicago. Writing on his blog, Turner says, "Let me be the first to say this plainly: these judges deserve to be killed," and includes photographs, phone numbers, work addresses, and room numbers of the judges, as well as a map of Chicago's federal courthouse which points out its "anti-truck bomb" pylons.

February 20, 2009-[from 2d hand report]FOX commentator Glenn Beck hosts a program that games a 2014 civil war scenario called "The Bubba Effect." [Citizen militias in the South and West take up arms against the U.S. government].

On the non-conservative side I recall that some "truther" lit supposedly inspired Bedell, the Pentagon gunman, last year.
Was Bedell killed on the spot? I don't recall.

QB1 can supply the FL shooter's inspiration, I imagine, from what he has written, some lefty blog.

I remember far more rightwingnuts calling for bullet remedies lately, but I am not keeping score and I am not *the scorekeeper*. That is not the point. No one, certainly no US Senator, should be afraid to call down violent rhetoric for what it is. That particular story surprised me.

We each bear responsibility for reining in our own ideological kin, *not* our opponents. That should make sense to you, on reflection.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 9, 2011 6:51 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues wrote,
"I was trying to remember what happened after 1968 in terms of gun control. Maybe nothing. I just remember myself being shocked for the first time in my young life that our political leaders were being shot, just for their views."

---

The Gun Control Act of 1968 dealt with possession of firearms by convicted felons. That probably limits some of the liberals who post here but hasn't stopped violence in America.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 6:52 PM | Report abuse

In my recollection here are the direct calls for guns and shooting from national office holders:

"... they bring a knife we bring a gun" Senator Barack Obama (D - Illinois).

"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 [sic] and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him." Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D - Pennsylvania)

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Rukidding

Im just trying to explain to you my thinking.

I havent had time to respond to all your points.

You are correct, in this political system we are stuck with two choices - and neither is perfect.

I have just seen so much corruption with the democrats - I don't want anything to do with them anymore.

Corruption is corruption. However, it is logical that the party which controls most of the big cities would be more corrupt. However, look at the STATE BUDGETS of the red states and blue states. You will clearly see that many BIG BLUE states are in terrible fiscal trouble California, New York, Illinois - and right down the line. Overall the red states have been more fiscally responsible. And the evidence is clearly there. The corruption in the democratic big cities also has to play a part in that. Just another reason - that after years of looking at these issues - one comes to the conclusions I have.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Stubborn restatements of positions refuted because they are our positions ossifies the debate and drives away points of view that might benefit us all.
-----------------------------------------
great post, ceflynline and thought provoking.

The difficulty is the word refuted. I doubt *anyone* here would ever admit *any* position has been refuted, even if it is the time of day erroneously typed. The need to win reigns supreme on the blog.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 6:54 PM | Report abuse

quarterback1 wrote,
"But hordes of leftists like wbgonne and good "Sheriff" Dupnik see it as self-evident that he was a Tea Partier triggered by conservative rhetoric. They are either insane themselves or without a bit of integrity, honor or principle."

---

I'm betting it's the second option.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 6:58 PM | Report abuse

The Gun Control Act of 1968 dealt with possession of firearms by convicted felons.
--------------------------------------------------
Thanks for that info. Is that the first time convicted felons were prohibited from gun possession?

If so, it's amazing that felons were allowed to have guns. I don't hear anyone lobbying for felons to be armed today.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

@ceflynline


Great post at 6:34. I agree with you and share your concerns. I applaud you hanging in there and issuing your challenge for civility and a new open minded approach on this blog.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 7:01 PM | Report abuse

For what it's worth, I grew up in Tucson.  My vet was across the street from that Safeway.  Dupnik's always been a hack.  He's also covering for the fact that this guy has been reported to his office (he's the Sheriff of Pima County) as well as the Tucson Police department.  If I had to guess, I'd bet at least couple of those times were by his parents and psychiatrist.  It's deflection time for Dupnik, and he's going to be out of a job before the next election.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 7:02 PM | Report abuse

TomInColorado - thanks - as I said I am not the scorekeeper.

It is up to Ds to call down Kanjorski for that comment, which was way over the line, as quoted. The President's allusion was insensitive at best, but Ds should have called for it to be walked back. My point remains that we need to police our ideological kin b/c criticizing our opponents does not add to civility nearly as much as keeping one's own side of the street clean.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 9, 2011 7:03 PM | Report abuse

what happened to music with a social conscience?

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 6:43 PM
-------

Didn't Toby Keith write a song called "Courtesy of the Red, White & Blue"? Maybe you've worn out your copy.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:04 PM | Report abuse

We each bear responsibility for reining in our own ideological kin, *not* our opponents. That should make sense to you, on reflection.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 9, 2011 6:51 PM

---

Would any of cao's "ideological kin" please step up to the plate.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:08 PM | Report abuse

"I suppose you forgot the assassination attempts directed at Reagan and Ford. How convenient."

Were both of those attempts following months of mainstream elected Dems or Dem candidates screaming about marxists or socialists? How about one calling for "2nd amendement solutions"? Had any elected Dems claimed that Reagan or Ford were not born in this country? That either one had been "palling around with terrorists"? Had a member of the House screamed that Reagan or Ford was lying during their SOTU speech? Had Reagan or Ford's face appeared with a crosshair over it? Did Reagan or Ford run against someone who invited supporters to "Help remove" them from office by shooting a fully automatic M16?

Yeah, sounds like they're exactly the same situations.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | January 9, 2011 7:08 PM | Report abuse

My point remains that we need to police our ideological kin b/c criticizing our opponents does not add to civility nearly as much as keeping one's own side of the street clean.
-----------------------------------------------------
Well said, Mark. Civility starts at home.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:08 PM | Report abuse

@Brigade

"That probably limits some of the liberals who post here but hasn't stopped violence in America."

Why do you post like this. A question asked in honesty and without snark.

Why do you need the gratuitous insults? Do you REALLY believe what you have just posted? That liberals are more likely than the Conservatives to have a felony record because that is the clear implication.

Are you really that happy insulting others.
Disagree with the policies...or observations but do you really need to be so consistently hostile.

And before you jump to explain by pointing out for the millionth time every nasty thing said about conservatives by liberals, just know that in effect you are happy to lower yourself to the lowest common denominator amongst us.

Lighten up.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, troll, for your comments about Sheriff Dupnik. He may be defensive for a reason. Time will tell, I'm sure.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:12 PM | Report abuse

In case you missed some of the Democratic Party's official maps targetting Republicans.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2654003/posts

Clearly they've lost their minds and are intentionally inciting violence.


Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Brigade.... Point taken on Toby Keith. But that is ONE song...if I started posting songs with a social conscience that were hits in the 60's and early 70' I'd be here the rest of the night.

Instead I'll toss of a challenge to any of my music loving friends...and if your old enough you might remember when they were referred to as "protest" songs. :-)

What is your favorite song with a point...a song with a conscience...something to say about some besides sex/drugs and rock and roll...not that I oppose sex/drugs and rock and roll.

Perhaps it's the madness in Afghanistan but my favorite song at the moment of that genre is John Fogerty and CCR's "Fortunate Son".

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 7:18 PM | Report abuse

If so, it's amazing that felons were allowed to have guns. I don't hear anyone lobbying for felons to be armed today.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:00 PM
------

If it were up to me, felons would have all of their rights restored after they've completed their sentences. You could probably make a case that those convicted of violent crimes or crimes involving the use of a firearm should forfeit their second amendment right, but surely not someone convicted of tax evasion. And the idea that felons should not be allowed to vote after they complete there sentences or should be barred from so many professions is ludicrous. The goal should be to help them rejoin society as productive members.

I recall a law passed a few years ago that prohibits anyone convicted of domestic abuse from owning or possessing a firearm. It applied retroactively. Police officers with many years of experience who had been involved in domestic disputes---not involving firearms---years earlier lost their jobs. It made no sense whatsoever, but politicians like to pretend they're doing useful things and, outside the black community, there just aren't enough people with criminal convictions to carry much political weight.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:18 PM | Report abuse

"He's also covering for the fact that this guy has been reported to his office (he's the Sheriff of Pima County) as well as the Tucson Police department. If I had to guess, I'd bet at least couple of those times were by his parents and psychiatrist."

Well, in the event that this is true, what could have been done? I'm not being snarky, I'm asking honestly. I mean unless his parents or his psychiatrist had very specific information as to his target, what were they legally allowed to do?

Posted by: schrodingerscat | January 9, 2011 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, sounds like they're exactly the same situations.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | January 9, 2011 7:08 PM

----

I don't recall saying or suggesting the situations were the same. Try to keep up.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:23 PM | Report abuse

"What is your favorite song with a point...a song with a conscience...something to say about some besides sex/drugs and rock and roll.."

"Man in Black", Johnny Cash. Not recent, but still incredibly relevant.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | January 9, 2011 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Well, brigade, you are proof that even convicted felons have their champions. You might even be right once one parses down to the embezzlers. I guess I'm just not that interested in the gun rights of embezzlers or wife/husband beaters. Actually, it makes me feel just a teeny bit better that some convicted husband poisoner is not allowed a gun. Ever. Fair or not.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Brigade:
I agree, unless it is a violent felony or felony with a firearm.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 7:27 PM | Report abuse

"I don't recall saying or suggesting the situations were the same. "

Good grief. Your reactions are so predictable - it's almost disappointing.

I'm sure you thought they were nothing like the Tucson shootings....that's precisely why you asked why they were forgotten.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | January 9, 2011 7:28 PM | Report abuse

s'cat,

Here you go.

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2011/01/09/megyn-kelly-confronts-liberal-sheriff-dupniks-attempts-to-politicize-shooting-video/

"Sheriff" Dupnik offering noting more than his speculation, based on what he admits are not facts at all, that (Republican) rhetoric and "vitriolic" ads triggered the psycho to murder. Very directly stating exactly what I said -- the problem is that one party (Republican) is blocking the other (Democrat) from trying to make this a better country.

I can hardly even wrap my mind around the irresponsibility, lack of professoinalism, and sheer depravity of this "man."

Start with the condemning already or admit it is all hot air.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 7:32 PM | Report abuse

rukidding wrote,
"Why do you need the gratuitous insults? Do you REALLY believe what you have just posted? That liberals are more likely than the Conservatives to have a felony record because that is the clear implication."

----

I think it's pretty much accepted fact that people with criminal histories are more likely to be left of center. Democrats usually push for restoration of voting rights; Republicans lean the other way. The rationale is that the new voters will likely be Democratic voters. I'm willing to consider any contrary evidence you can provide.

As a matter of fairness, I've always advocated for restoration of rights to any and all who have completed their sentences---with certain exceptions regarding danger to society. See my prior post. The goal should be combating recidivism, not contributing to it.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Gun rights for *some* convicted felons? I'm beginning to understand why it is so difficult to deny guns to psychotics.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:33 PM | Report abuse

ruk:

"For What It's Worth," Buffalo Springfield

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Factor in that this same "Sheriff" was six months ago attacking his own Governor and legislators as racists, and was directly implying exactly the same thing yesterday in reprising his assertions that Arizona has become the center of bigotry and racism.

The audacity of audacity.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps it's the madness in Afghanistan but my favorite song at the moment of that genre is John Fogerty and CCR's "Fortunate Son".

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 7:18 PM
----

For me, Phil Ochs was the big daddy of protest singers in the 1960's. He never survived the era. Committed suicide.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:35 PM | Report abuse

S-cat, I post for you a layman' guide to AZ gun law.

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

If the gunman was ineligible to own a weapon in AZ the Sheriff's Dept probably had the duty to post him on a list at gun dealers.
That would be the extent of it, I think. An AZ prosecutor would be a handy poster here.

ruk - 1984. Sting. *Russians*, made more compelling for me b/c he interposed a refrain from "Kije", Prokofieff's movie score.
That movie, set in Tsarist Russia, about a fictional Lt. Kije who was invented by junior officers on a bet they could paper a whole officer right by the bureaucracy, was really a clever anti-Stalinist protest, that Stalin did not get, thankfully for the survival of the movie makers and Prokofieff.
----------------------------------
In Europe and America, there's a growing feeling of hysteria
Conditioned to respond to all the threats
In the rhetorical speeches of the Soviets
Mr. Krushchev said we will bury you
I don't subscribe to this point of view
It would be such an ignorant thing to do
If the Russians love their children too

How can I save my little boy from Oppenheimer's deadly toy
There is no monopoly in common sense
On either side of the political fence
We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too

There is no historical precedent
To put the words in the mouth of the President
There's no such thing as a winnable war
It's a lie we don't believe anymore
Mr. Reagan says we will protect you
I don't subscribe to this point of view
Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too

We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
What might save us, me, and you
Is if the Russians love their children too


Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 9, 2011 7:37 PM | Report abuse

I find it odd that Sheriff Dupnik is getting all the blame. He gets the microphone because he's the local sheriff and he gets to speak his opinion. Tomorrow, when the FBI gets the microphone and they speak, are they going to get dumped on? Perhaps the senior Republican senator was right to insist on anonymity.

I would not be at all surprised that the sheriff is defensive, and perhaps, for good reason as troll reports. But, he didn't cause this by any of his after the fact comments. Can't we find anyone else to dump on other than the guy investigating the crime?

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Gun rights for *some* convicted felons? I'm beginning to understand why it is so difficult to deny guns to psychotics.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:33 PM

---

By definition, a "psychotic" may be a danger to others. Do you have any reason to suspect that Dan Rostenkowski might go on a killing spree if his rights were restored? You have to understand that people who want to use guns to commit crimes are always able to get them. I'm more concerned with the fellow who has his life straightened out and may want to go hunting or keep a handgun under his pillow if he lives in a bad neighborhood.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:44 PM | Report abuse

"I can hardly even wrap my mind around the irresponsibility, lack of professoinalism, and sheer depravity of this "man.""

Yes....the quote was so unbelievably outrageous that even Megyn Kelly responded by saying "That's a fair point...."

In all seriousness, I think that you're being a bit unfair....I think he was trying to make a larger point about how vitriolic our conversations have become and he was specifically responding to Kelly's question....I will also point out that he never specifies "Dems" or "Repubs".....but I also think that there's a time and place for everything and it's probably better that he didn't say anything.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | January 9, 2011 7:46 PM | Report abuse

I hope we find out which drugs in addition to marijuana the shooter was using.
I suspect he lied on the Federal form filled out for FBI NICS pre-purchase background check.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 7:47 PM | Report abuse

@Sue Wow...great choice...I had forgotten about Stephen Stills and the boys.

My favorite lines from your favorite...
so many but...

Nobody's right if everybody's wrong...

Paranoia strikes deep...
Into your soul it will creep...

That's what worries me today...the amount of paranoia and fear is so palpable.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Do you have any reason to suspect that Dan Rostenkowski might go on a killing spree if his rights were restored?
--------------------------------------------------
No, I don't. But I don't care if Dan can't own a gun. We can't make laws with Dan's name in it. I can't get up any enthusiasm to restore gun rights to convicted felons. There are too many injustices that are way more important, in my humble opinion.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Phil Ochs, There But for Fortune:

Show me a prison, show me a jail
Show me a pris'ner whose face has grown pale

And I'll show you a young man
With many reasons why
There but for fortune, go you or I

Show me an alley, show me a train
Show me a hobo who sleeps out in the rain

And I'll show you a young man
With many reasons why
There but for fortune, go you or I

Show me the whiskey stains on the floor
Show me a drunk as he stumbles out the door

And I'll show you a young man
With many reasons why
There but for fortune, go you or I

Show me a country where the bombs had to fall
Show me the ruins of buildings so tall

And I'll show you a young land
With many reasons why
There but for fortune, go you or I
You or I

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:49 PM | Report abuse

"Factor in that this same "Sheriff" was six months ago attacking his own Governor and legislators as racists"

At the exact time when his own Governor was lying about headless bodies littering the AZ desert....for which there was no evidence because it wasn't true. And at the same time when a number of pols from AZ were decrying the increase in violence on the border, when in truth, looking at actual crime statistics, was actually declining.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/05/02/20100502arizona-border-violence-mexico.html

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Phil Ochs, Draft Dodger Rag:

Oh, I'm just a typical American boy from a typical American town
I believe in God and Senator Dodd and a-keepin' old Castro down
And when it came my time to serve I knew "better dead than red"
But when I got to my old draft board, buddy, this is what I said:

CHORUS
Sarge, I'm only eighteen, I got a ruptured spleen
And I always carry a purse
I got eyes like a bat, and my feet are flat, and my asthma's getting worse
Yes, think of my career, my sweetheart dear, and my poor old invalid aunt
Besides, I ain't no fool, I'm a-goin' to school
And I'm working in a DEE-fense plant

I've got a dislocated disc and a wracked up back
I'm allergic to flowers and bugs
And when the bombshell hits, I get epileptic fits
And I'm addicted to a thousand drugs
I got the weakness woes, I can't touch my toes
I can hardly reach my knees
And if the enemy came close to me
I'd probably start to sneeze

I'm only eighteen, I got a ruptured spleen
And I always carry a purse
I got eyes like a bat, and my feet are flat, and my asthma's getting worse
Yes, think of my career, my sweetheart dear, and my poor old invalid aunt
Besides, I ain't no fool, I'm a-goin' to school
And I'm working in a DEE-fense plant

Ooh, I hate Chou En Lai, and I hope he dies,
Onething you gotta see
That someone's gotta go over there
And that someone isn't me
So I wish you well, Sarge, give 'em Hell!
Kill me a thousand or so
And if you ever get a war without blood and gore
I'll be the first to go

Yes, I'm only eighteen, I got a ruptured spleen
And I always carry a purse
I got eyes like a bat, and my feet are flat, and my asthma's getting worse
Yes, think of my career, my sweetheart dear, and my poor old invalid aunt
Besides, I ain't no fool, I'm a-goin' to school
And I'm working in a DEE-fense plant

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 7:52 PM | Report abuse

"My point remains that we need to police our ideological kin b/c criticizing our opponents does not add to civility nearly as much as keeping one's own side of the street clean."

It's a prisoners' dilemma. I guess ar Mr. Centrist, you're going to say that both sides are equally responsible for the negative rhetoric.

But we know this isn't true. Republicans have gotten a lot of mileage in the Bush years impugning the patriotism of people who opposed the Iraq War. If we only ask Dems to maintain a clean house and not Republicans, what is the incentive? Dems are losers on all ends. The Republicans claims of death panels go unchallenged AND the over the top Dems get to have a nice bright spotlight shined on them from both sides.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 9, 2011 7:52 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues,
"No, I don't. But I don't care if Dan can't own a gun. We can't make laws with Dan's name in it. I can't get up any enthusiasm to restore gun rights to convicted felons."
-------

And that's the problem for any minority group of people to which the government has not afforded "protected" status. Other people "just don't care". And they're easy targets for politicians who want to DO something. Got a problem to solve? Pass some law that deprives a currently law-abiding citizen of some right because of some mistake he made 25 years ago. Besides it wouldn't cost much to house ole Dan for 5 or 10 more years if we caught him skeet shooting.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 8:01 PM | Report abuse

"What is your favorite song with a point...a song with a conscience...something to say about some besides sex/drugs and rock and roll...not that I oppose sex/drugs and rock and roll."

Sex Pistols, Holidays in the Sun.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 8:05 PM | Report abuse

The truth is that Obama's people are now on a non-stop SMEAR campaign aimed at smearing Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

This has to have Obama's personal approval - or Obama could stop it immediately.

The QUESTION is clear: is this the kind of activity which the American People want the President of the United States to be involved in?


I find this smear campaign to be highly out-of-bounds. And for high government officials to be engaging in this conduct, it is unAmerican and has no place in our political system.


The American People should take note - I have to wonder if laws have been broken this weekend as the democrats, who are in control of the government, are conducting a smear campaign against their political opponents on the side.


All this has NO PLACE in a criminal investigation.


Obama is politicizing a criminal investigation - it has to be of questionable legality.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 8:05 PM | Report abuse

ruk:

Enjoy!

http://s0.ilike.com/play#Buffalo+Springfield:For+What+It%27s+Worth:40664:s502076.10985824.14110625.0.2.67%2Cstd_54916568897849528e46f623a9c00142

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Youngbloods; "Get Together"

Musically tight, instrumentally virtuoso, a little sappy, but easy to sing-a-long-to which is why there is songs(sic) heh.

{{{Plus all my teen crushes thought Jesse was cool}}}

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 8:09 PM | Report abuse

ddawd, centrists get to call out everyone. That's our job. :-)

We are trying to reach for the ideal here.

Ideally, D voters should tell their party to cut spending and R voters should tell their party to raise taxes. Got it?

Sorry about the Saints...

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 9, 2011 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Homicide rates in the US, per capita, are about 5X that of other western nations. Homicide with firearms show and even greater contrast. These figures are obviously relevant even if solutions are not immediately evident.

US gun culture, too, is obviously relevant. As a Canadian, I can assure you that the facility with which pro-gun advocates dismiss the consequences of their notions and policies is perceived from outside the country as about as sane as membership in poisonous-snake cults.

And the US is unique within western nations too as regards its history or violence towards political figures whether in office or in positions of political influence.

But all of this, difficult to do much about apparently, is made more critical and dangerous when, as one poster put it yesterday, the social compact is in the process of fracturing.

Is it? How would one determine that?

First of all, it wouldn't happen abruptly but incrementally, which makes it more difficult to discern or, for some, make it easier to deny that such a phenomenon is occurring.

Second, it would take the form (as it has wherever we might point as earlier examples) of a building consensus among portions of a population that others within the nation are in some manner illegitimate and deserve to be excluded from the compact with its rights and privileges.

It is a tribal phenomenon and it manifests along a scale of increasing exclusion...

- "they are different"

- "they are not my people, they belong elsewhere and I have no obligation to allow them to live among us nor any obligation to assist them or even care about them"

- "they are destructive or evil and must be, for the good of the community, expelled or slaughtered."

Obviously, and as many have noted, such tendencies are exacerbated during periods where some new stressor arises, eg 9/11 or a severe economic downturn, or significant immigration, environmental degradation, or competition for increasingly rare or expensive resources, or changes brought on by technology, etc.

All of which might lead us to conclude that what we are seeing now might be perhaps quite predictable, if deeply unfortunate and ugly.

But none of these structural or social factors speak to our personal or community moral imperatives such as Greg and others are discussing. If I get some time later (and if I'm not too bummed out by everything) I'll speak to that.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 9, 2011 8:10 PM | Report abuse

@Sue

Thanks for the link.

@Mark in Austin

Interesting choice. Thanks for the lyrics
I like the line...
"We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
What might save us, me, and you
Is if the Russians love their children too"

@S.C. Surprise...Johnny Cash. I remembered the song but I went back to read the lyrics...Great choice. I had forgotten what a great writer the late great Cash.

@Brigade...love Och's lyrics and writing but not so enamored of the music...perhaps an acquired taste...but he certainly had a conscience and is a great writer.

@Troll Your choice of the Sex Pistols surprised me least of all the selections.
Its very easy to imagine you modeling your life with Sid Vicious and Johnny Rotten as a role models. And judging from the tone of many of your posts Johnny Rotten and Sid Vicious would be proud.......just joking Troll...you love a little snark don't you?

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 8:20 PM | Report abuse

"But all of this, difficult to do much about apparently, is made more critical and dangerous when, as one poster put it yesterday, the social compact is in the process of fracturing."

Do you think the U.S. "Social Compact" in this country has broken down before? If so, when?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 8:23 PM | Report abuse

QBs comments are part and parcel to the Republican psychosis that led to this assassination incident. Attack anyone who dares tell it like it is, attack anyone who disagrees. Attack attack attack.

The Republican Party - not the fringe but the mainstream establishment - has irresponsibly and intentionally incited huge swaths of the Republican electorate with fear-mongering and race-baiting tactics. That is simply a FACT. It is time for the Republican Blood Lust to END. They have kicked the hornets' nest and now a true American Hero of the People lies in a hospital bed with a grievous gunshot wound to the head. NO more blood lust. NO more lies, fear-mongering and race-baiting. Say NO to Floyd Brown and his propaganda. Say NO to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sarah Palin. Say NO to the rhetoric of violence and hatred. Say NO to putting your ideology and your political party over the good of the people. This country NEEDS to move FORWARD. We CANNOT do so without two parties interested in moving America forward. If the Republican Party isn't willing to work on the economy and jobs and important issues from a standpoint of reality, then either the American people need to rise up and remove them from power or they will destroy America forever. We cannot let that happen.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 9, 2011 8:26 PM | Report abuse

ruk,

Happy New Year.

"@Troll Your choice of the Sex Pistols surprised me least of all the selections.
Its very easy to imagine you modeling your life with Sid Vicious and Johnny Rotten as a role models. And judging from the tone of many of your posts Johnny Rotten and Sid Vicious would be proud.......just joking Troll...you love a little snark don't you?"

Well, I prefer "Bodies" but thought a few heads might explode. As for modeling, I'd pick Johnny (Lydon) Rotten over Sid Vicious, as Johnny's still alive and touring ;-)

And loving snark? Moi?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 8:28 PM | Report abuse

OK. This kid was some sort of right winger gold standard, think abortion is assassination kind of person.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/37872_Shooter_Planned_Assassination_Compared_Abortion_to_Terrorism/comments/#ctop

What right wing violence?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | January 9, 2011 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Brigade,

Sorry but Ethan = clearly insane.

Maybe no integrity or principles, either. But definitely insane.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 8:30 PM | Report abuse

@tao "Get Together" ? The Youngbloods?

Have you morphed from a hippie background? lol

Agree it is a great tune and we must be close to contemporary in age..me a bit older..but my crushes didn't fall for Jesse Colin Young...they were busy trying to decide between Paul McCartney or Peter Noone.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 8:30 PM | Report abuse

ethan,
Your forgot Dale Robertson.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 8:32 PM | Report abuse

"a population that others...are in some manner illegitimate"

Well, B, we have a micro-"population" right here at PL. And I can tell you the main-force oppo technique per my posts is to pre-deem them extreme out of hand, with response/discourse being about the last option chosen.

"The modern method [of argumentation] is to assume without discussion that [your opponent] is wrong and then distract his attention from this (the only real issue) by busily explaining how he became so silly. In the course of the last fifteen years I have found this vice so common that I have had to invent a name for it. I call it Bulverism. Some day I am going to write the biography of its imaginary inventor, Ezekiel Bulver, whose destiny was determined at the age of five when he heard his mother say to his father — who had been maintaining that two sides of a triangle were together greater than the third — ‘Oh you say that because you are a man.’ ‘At that moment’, E. Bulver assures us, ‘there flashed across my opening mind the great truth that refutation is no necessary part of argument. Assume that your opponent is wrong, and then explain his error, and the world will be at your feet. Attempt to prove that he is wrong or (worse still) try to find out whether he is wrong or right, and the national dynamism of our age will thrust you to the wall.’ That is how Bulver became one of the makers of the Twentieth Century."
C. S. Lewis, “Bulverism;” The Socratic Digest, 1944

{{{nb.: Joy Behar and Richard Wolfe aren't the coldest Buds in the 6pak}}}

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 8:37 PM | Report abuse

We can debate causes of this shooting forever but one thing is undeniable...it's almost always a white male(right or left) who goes off and commits mass murder...or assassinates politicians...Squeaky Fromme being an obvious exception that comes immediately to mind. But that's just it. She is an exception.

It's getting embarrassing to be a white guy. Why is it always white males who wack out and assassinate and commit mass murders. Not being nasty or snarky just seriously curious if anybody knows the answer.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 8:40 PM | Report abuse

This isn't that big a deal. It is not a spiritual crisis, it is an intersection between America's disregard for the violent potential of crazy people and America's gun culture. Incitement is always everywhere.

The Ft Hood killer was clearly giving himself away, so was this guy; on 44 "I'm afraid he is going to come into the class with a gun...Hopefully he will be out of class very soon, and not come back with an automatic weapon,." and so were so many others, Cho at Va Tech, the Columbine kids. I am worried America has lost the art of drawing the line, there was an ok book about that a few years ago. We think we can't figure out what is ok and not ok so we play at the extremes, as if we have to.

Case after case after case I work with I am left shaking my head, "how did everyone let it go this far." We have people packing their ears with feces to stop the voices telling them to kill, kill, kill. I could tell you stories just from the last few months you would never forget, not kidding.

You people diagnosing each other as crazy and dangerous are showing no respect for the dead. Dangerous crazy people have to get identified and treated. By far, by far the great volume of their victims are domestic, are children, old people, the pets. But we fear the politics of coercive treatment, because all of the totalitarian governments decided to abuse the concept. We can draw the line, we can make crazy people get help without calling sane people crazy to make them go away.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 9, 2011 8:40 PM | Report abuse

But we fear the politics of coercive treatment, because all of the totalitarian governments decided to abuse the concept. We can draw the line, we can make crazy people get help without calling sane people crazy to make them go away.
-----------------------------------------------------
You have one person on your side on this, and that's me. Psychotics calling the shots on their own treatment is, excuse the term, crazy. My psychotic childhood friend is totally sane, which she has told me many times.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 8:50 PM | Report abuse

The amount of people meth has killed, one way or another is a national disgrace, in no way related to guns, political incitement or mental illness. We have to work on the real threats and they are the same old things, all around us, child abuse, alcoholic and drug using parents. Look, crazy people killing politicians has been going on forever, so is that why WWI happened? Of course not. My point is, this isn't a political problem, it is a domestic policy problem.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 9, 2011 8:53 PM | Report abuse

"But we fear the politics of coercive treatment, because all of the totalitarian governments decided to abuse the concept. We can draw the line, we can make crazy people get help without calling sane people crazy to make them go away. "

We used to do so. Is that why you think we stopped, because "all of the totalitarian governments decided to abuse the concept."? I dunno. Seems more like ECT and it's portrayal in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest along with some misguided (I think) desire to let people, even severely mentally ill people, decide for themselves. Interesting study at the link.

http://pb.rcpsych.org/cgi/reprint/9/6/112.pdf

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Honestly folks, the democrats have had an "in your face" attitude about Obama.


The democrats have taken the position that they have been so angry about the Florida recount, and the Iraq war - that they simply don't care if having Obama is "in your face."

The democrats appear almost gleeful that they have Obama to STICK "in your face."


For all the rhetoric of the 2008 campaign, of bipartisanship, post-partisanship, and compromise - this "in your face" attitude of the democrats has always been there.

Not very conciliatory - NOT fostering a sense of community - or good feelings among anyone.

I never have seen democrats act like this - and again I think it was the Florida recount and the Iraq War.


However, those two things - most Republicans had little to do with. The people on your block, in your neighborhood had nothing to do with any of that.

But SOMEHOW to the democrats - that ALL became personal - the attitude was "Im going to give it to those Republicans - Im going to give it to them "in your face"

Elect a black man - that will get "in the faces" of the Republicans.

Gleeful. Not helping the situation.

Hey - we should talk about all this.


However, over the past ten years I have seen adults act like... well, not like adults should act.

And it is that simple.

Today, I have given some examples of Obama's tactics - and what Obama's people have done on the internet.

Im not happy about any of that. I don't it contributes to a civil atmosphere.

I am convinced that Obama is PERSONALLY APPROVING AND RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE TACTICS.

Obama certainly has done NOTHING to stop or restrain his people. One can draw no other conclusion that Obama personally is behind all of these tactics.

And we can start with the False Charges of Racism - and the constant INTIMIDATION TACTICS of the democrats.

Obama has been OUT-OF-BOUNDS for some time.

It would be nice if some democrats start to voice that they agree.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 9:04 PM | Report abuse

@shrink....

Glad you're hear this evening. Can you tell me why it's almost always white males who do these wack things?

While I agree with your post shrink and also understand 12B's concern with the mentally unstable and potentially violent in our midst I would like to split a hair.

Shrink you said "But we fear the politics of coercive treatment, because all of the totalitarian governments decided to abuse the concept."

Perhaps true but for me it's actually worse than that. I do not fear the totalitarian governments and their horrible experiments or excuses to simply lock people up...we expect that from totalitarian governments and so are at least forewarned or not caught unexpectedly, not that makes much difference to the poor Russian in a 1930's Gulag.

I fear our people more than the totalitarians. Have you read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine."
She is an economist not a psychologist but her book begins with the infamous Ewen Cameron experiments back in the 1950's on Electro shock therapy. In the 50's many people were trying to remake the human mind, including the CIA. And so the CIA secretly funded Cameron's experiments, which in many ways could have been performed in a gulag or concentration camp and they took place of all places in Bernie's beloved peace loving Canada. Then we learn recently of the horrible VD experiments in Central America. Bring us up to date with the rendition of some innocent people...well call me paranoid.

Still I suspect enough of us have been touched by mental illness in our family or in a friends family to know of heartbreaking decisions of forcibly hospitalizing an ill person because of their mental condition, especially difficult if it's a friend, relative or loved one.

I completely understand and agree with both of you shrink and 12B but good luck with this conversation. It's right up there with end of life discussions. Immediately "death panels" and rationing come to mind. Forcibly hospitalizing the mentally ill will probably bring the civil libertarians to a boil.

A related question Shrink. Law officers in my community have complained for the past decade about budget cuts in mental health care resulting in large numbers of sick who should be in hospitals instead of wandering around homeless on the street.
Is this just Law Enforcement whining? Perhaps an urban myth? Or have budgetary constraints contributed to this problem?

@12 Bar If you haven't read the Klein book yet I recommend it highly. Being in finance you will appreciate a political book written by an economist.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 9:09 PM | Report abuse

shrink: "My point is, this isn't a political problem, it is a domestic policy problem."

Call it like it really is: a domestic healthcare policy problem. And probably even more accurately: a domestic mental healthcare policy problem.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 9:12 PM | Report abuse

@ruk: I'm ticked at you.

I was trying to make the case for the WaPo Troll Hunter, about 10 hours worth of development time had been devoted to specific complaints you had, and you disappeared without even trying it out. What?

Works in Firefox with Greasemonkey and it's a 3 minute install, which I can give you step by step instructions on. Works with Google Chrome. I've gotten it to work in Safari by installed SIMBL and Greasekit (a little more complicated, but not much). I don't think it works in Opera right now, but if you're using Opera, I'll get it working in Opera (there are a few more steps to getting it up and running in Opera, but . . . if that's what you use, I'll get it working).

Not only does it add a super simple "Ignore" button for everybody, it moves the posters name above each comment a hilites it, and keeps a count of how many posts each person has contributed, and makes links clickable.

It's frickin' awesome. Clickable links. Automatically opens links open in a new tab or window, depending on the browser. It's so cool.

I was very disappointed by your disappearance, when the Troll Hunter was filled with features custom designed just for you. So disappointed I'm going to cross post this.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Kevin....you've busted me! LMAO I'm not a technical geek or nerd...nor am I computer illiterate...alas I am lazy.

If I could download the software and it works instantly without muss or fuss...how often does that happen...you should have seen the hoops I had to jump through just to get Outlook contacts and calendar to sync with my Droid.

Anyway it seems as if things are still pretty much the same. Overall the tone has begun to improve...perhaps the result of the tragedy...which quite frankly is what made me return...I wanted to see the reaction among the folks whose political persuasion I knew up front.

Anyway thanks for the thought. How are things in Memphis. Are you getting blasted with the Winter storm? 3-6" of snow in Atlanta? Talk about simply staying in bed if you live in Fulton Co. Ga. Folks in GA are not prepared for 6" of snow...how about Memphis...are you getting hit...do you guys bother with snow removal equipment or is it too rare of an occurrence to bother?

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 9:22 PM | Report abuse

shrink,

I've appreciated your comments on this topic. They are sensible and valued, by me at least.

But with respect I think your criticisms ought to be directed where they belong -- at those shameless and honorless manipulators and liars who decided within hours to politicize this terrible tragedy. I'm entirely weary of entertaining notions that these people's views have the slightest legitimacy or that there is any equivalancy.

As for calling people crazy, just look at Ethan's string of comments in the past 36 hours -- one stream of unremitting attacks and slanders, all completely divorced from the facts of the case and indeed absurd in light of the facts of the case. It makes no difference how absurd they become in light of the facts, he just doubles down. The bottom line is that many like him on the left decided that since a Democrat was killed Palin and Beck are to blame, and that's all they need to know. When it turns out the kid was a lefty and had a psychotic break, no matter. They just double down, and accuse the other side of "attacks" to boot.

I'm just a layman, but that seems pretty crazy to me. Sure, he probably isn't really clinically psychotic, but if you want to train your criticism on the people who politicized these murders and disrespected the dead, you really should look to the left, not only those of us who said all along it has nothing to do with politics.

Your point about drawing lines is an interesting one. I don't know what book you were referencing, but I would suggest that the contemporary erosion of lines is another consequence of what are generally a set of leftist ideologies and philosophical approaches. For the past 40-50 years, our society has been under the pregressive sway of a liberal ideology that says many "lines" handed down to us are no more than prejudices and bigotries that should be jettisoned in the name of equality or "freedom." The wisdom of past generations is counted instead as a load of superstition and oppression.

That's a broad generalization and a topic for another time. But an interesting one on which I suspect we would share some recognition of a problem but little else about its causes or treatment.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 9:23 PM | Report abuse

Ruk

Happy New Year

Sid Vicious was quite a character


However I want to further what I have been saying with a point.


This "in your face" attitude of the democrats.

It has appeared that that democrats have been gleeful to STICK Obama's race in the face's of the Republicans.


So, this attitude is DIRECTLY RELATED TO OBAMA'S RACE.


The point is that it is the DEMOCRATS doing this.


AND one STILL has to wonder if a freshman Senator with a few years in the Senate, much of it on a booktour - a WHITE SENATOR WITH A FEW YEARS EXPERIENCE would ever have been considered to run for President.


Obama - his RACE is central - the case can be made that people were attracted to him BECAUSE of his race - surely there are other people in Congress who went to Harvard with far more experience.


So, the democrats HAD TO vote for Obama BECAUSE of his race.


So, the country is stuck on this.

It is almost racist - to vote for someone BECAUSE they are black - because by implication there is a WHITE candidate NOT getting that vote because they are WHITE.


Anyway, the point is that the democrats have used Obama's race TO BE DIVISIVE, not to be uniting, or post-racial or anything like that.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 9:23 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010 at 8:26 PM


The only possible reply to your comment at 8:26 is you need to be put in a straight-jacket.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 9:26 PM | Report abuse

"QBs comments are part and parcel to the Republican psychosis that led to this assassination incident. Attack anyone who dares tell it like it is, attack anyone who disagrees. Attack attack attack."

As if we didn't already know it, Ethan is in Stage 3 of Bernie's societal breakdown scale.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Yes suekz, but it has been foisted off into enforcement and corrections and everybody in this line of work knows that.

Yes, ruk it is not law enforcement whining, I have had cops tell me stuff like, "I love you like a brother," after they understand I understand and we have worked together on cases. I take that for real and yet, just this week at lunch a shrink told me, "I really don't like the police, they hate the mentally ill." No, they don't.

But Troll yes, it is about One Flew, that is what we call it. America's legacy of mistreating the mentally ill does not rival anything in totalitarian history, but it was atrocious and it exists in living memory.

"Forcibly hospitalizing the mentally ill will probably bring the civil libertarians to a boil." It has, so we put them in jail, most times, then they get out, madder than hell. It is a disgrace that we can't have this conversation at policy levels. The problem affects everyone. I talk to the parents about what to do. I tell them they just have to keep calling 911. We have to do better than that.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 9, 2011 9:32 PM | Report abuse

"Anyway, the point is that the democrats have used Obama's race TO BE DIVISIVE, not to be uniting, or post-racial or anything like that."

Is it your position RTR that Dems secretly infiltrated Tea party gatherings and smuggled in all those signs...

Is it your opinion that my reactionary right wing neighbor who sent out the infamous Obama as a witch doctor email to his Tea party compatriots, or all the jokes that filled the internet with watermelons on the WH lawn...Obama and Michelle as p*mp and wh*ore were actually planted by the Dems.

I'm sorry RTR. I tried but you're just too far over the top for me and too extreme.

Good luck and Happy New Year but I'm afraid I'll have to return with my fellow posters in ....cmon RTF give us freaking break. :-) Nice chatting with you.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 9:32 PM | Report abuse

shrink,

How much influence in mental health policy did One Flew have in your estimation? I've heard that before, but it's always hard to fathom.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 9:34 PM | Report abuse

"As if we didn't already know it, Ethan is in Stage 3 of Bernie's societal breakdown scale."

Snort.

I wonder if bernie's "societal breakdown scale" goes to eleven*?

*(Shameless Spinal Tap reference)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 9:41 PM | Report abuse

overwhelming?
unfathomable?
controls the narrative?

If a person says they work at a state mental hospital, what is the very first thing that pops into mind?


Posted by: shrink2 | January 9, 2011 9:41 PM | Report abuse

@shrink

Thanks for your contribution both here on the blog and in society. I do hear and understand what you are saying.

I have a sister in law who has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. When she takes her meds she is OK.

It was very tough on my wife and her siblings. My sister in law seems so perfectly normal except for one prominent delusion...she believes her husband of close to 50 years ago had an affair perhaps 40 years ago. She also believes this resulted in a love child who wants to harm her and take all of her stuff. She believes since it's her hubby's child he is on her side. She is so delusional that at times he carries stuff like coffee and flour in her purse so this imaginary "Elizabeth" can't get to it.

As Sue suggested we can't or won't even take care of our physically ill...it's hard to contemplate what is happening to our mentally ill.

Thanks for your attempt to make a difference in a very tough situation.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 9:43 PM | Report abuse

qb, I've got the book here ...rummaging...
it is dinner with kids time, I'll talk later...

Posted by: shrink2 | January 9, 2011 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Shrink,

It's my understanding that ECT is one of the best treatments for those with severe depression where psychotropics either don't work or work incompletely. Is that true?

As a side note, and one to offend nearly everybody here, I used to be the GSK psych Rep in, of all places, Tucson. If this freak was being treated by a shrink in Tucson, odds are that I knew him/her.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 9:46 PM | Report abuse

shrink,

No worries. We'll get what further insights you can share when you can. Again, they are much appreciated.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 9:47 PM | Report abuse

On e more minute, kids still washing hands...

here it is

http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Art-Drawing-Line-Fairness/dp/0375504222

ECT saves lives. The way they plugged people into the wall decades ago has nothing to do with what is possible nowadays.

later

Posted by: shrink2 | January 9, 2011 9:51 PM | Report abuse

@Brigade: "I suppose you forgot the assassination attempts directed at Reagan and Ford. How convenient."

I'm sure not, but it's worth noting that Hinkley was obsessed with Jodie Foster. His attempted assassination was, to some degree, in his mind, a grand and dramatic act to . . . provoke something in regards to Jodie Foster.

Most folks who would kill a politician over ideological disagreements have bigger mental problems (and, usually, other fetishistic obsessions) than their political views. Hinkley is an excellent example of that.

The argument regarding tone boils down to the assertion that these are actors that would be mollified in the face of a softer, more rational, more dispassionate public dialog. And while I think that's an admirable goal, I don't think it dissuades crazy people.

In any case, what this argument will tend to sound like to the the people that it's directed at is this: "Your opinions are dangerous, and you are responsible for what we think other people do, because of your dangerous opinions. Therefore, you shouldn't express your opinions, because, if you do, someone will get hurt. This also invalidates your dangerous and counter-factual opinions, by the way."

So, it's hard to encourage them to soften their rhetoric when you seem to be blaming them for causing other people to do bad things by having the temerity to hold an opinion different than yours.

I'm all for the rhetoric being toned down, BTW. Would love to see that. I'm just not sure that "see, you did this! you, with your opinions, and your 'socialist' and 'marxist', you made this happen!" is the path to more affable discussions.

But, of course, I could be wrong.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Prof. Robert George scourges "Sheriff" Dupnik.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256687/dishonorable-sheriff-robert-p-george

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 9:59 PM | Report abuse

shrink : "it has been foisted off into enforcement and corrections and everybody in this line of work knows that."

Yes, I know. I have two relatives who work in mental health. One is a school psychologist working in a very poor, rural district that has a huge meth problem, and the other works in corrections, probably in a similar capacity as you. Neither has the resources to really solve problems. It's more about patching people up and moving them along.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 10:01 PM | Report abuse

People like quarterback1 are jumping on Dupnik's comments as being irresponsible, knee-jerk diatribes against the vitriol of the Tea Party. But they forget that among all the people out there talking about this horrific event (and with the exception of Randall Terry we can all agree it was horrific), Sheriff Dupnik knows the shooter; and has spent serious time interrogating him. Kyl doesn't know jack, Durbin doesn't know jack, Matt Bai and Sarah Palin don't know jack. But Dupnick does, and I'm inclined to listen to someone who has been in the room with the assassin.

Posted by: mercerreader | January 9, 2011 10:05 PM | Report abuse

"People like quarterback1 are jumping on Dupnik's comments as being irresponsible, knee-jerk diatribes against the vitriol of the Tea Party. But they forget that among all the people out there talking about this horrific event (and with the exception of Randall Terry we can all agree it was horrific), Sheriff Dupnik knows the shooter; and has spent serious time interrogating him. Kyl doesn't know jack, Durbin doesn't know jack, Matt Bai and Sarah Palin don't know jack. But Dupnick does, and I'm inclined to listen to someone who has been in the room with the assassin."

I'd bet money that Dupnik hasn't even met this guy. I'm also guessing he's in Fed custody now.

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

@ruk: "Folks in GA are not prepared for 6" of snow...how about Memphis...are you getting hit...do you guys bother with snow removal equipment or is it too rare of an occurrence to bother?"

We have snow removal equipment. It's called "the sun".

Ba-dum-dum.

Snow started just an hour or so ago. I'm thinking I may end up on a ladder with a broom sweeping snow off our new screened in porch tomorrow. We just got that thing, I don't want the snow collapsing it. ;)

School system already closed for students. I know from previous experience that it probably isn't going to close for us--we're expected to show up, no matter what the weather is, so we probably will. Big thing going on here is Memphis City is the Memphis City Schools surrendering it's charter, which means that the smaller school system (us) will end up having to take over the much larger school system. Thus becoming the 16th or 14th largest school system in the country. And, without any plans or studies or any preparatory work having been done. Just "bang!"

Gonna be fun. And will make many lawyers very rich.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/jan/09/be-prepared-showdown-over-schools/

The Commercial Appeal supports consolidation, so they are soft-pedaling some of the negatives, but it's going to be both expensive and messy, messy, messy.

Ruk: What browser do you use? I can walk you through installed the Troll Hunter, if it's not Internet Explorer. It will be relative quick and painless. I've got it working on all my browsers now (except Opera).

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 10:16 PM | Report abuse

Definitely Fed custody.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 9, 2011 10:17 PM | Report abuse

rukidding

I keep on talking about general issues with the democratic party and Obama.

And instead of responding to the specifics - and I have written alot - not my normal quick-hitting points.

Instead of responding, you keep on bringing up the Tea Party and insisting you have reason to hate them - because someone on your block did something wrong.


That really is not any of the issues I have addressed.


Also, you started this conversation by asking me about my poltical views - and you keep on bringing up some nutty people on your block.


I really can't help you there -


The democrats should have EXPECTED that some people in this nation would react to Obama the way they have - to take those few people and try to use them to SMEAR all Republicans, well, that is not only a logical fallacy.

What it is is a set-up. The democrats have provoked the nuts in this country to well... act nutty. And suddenly ALL the Republicans are bad.

WELL - my point is that the democrats have been GLEEFUL to provoke people - because they are unhappy about things that happened years ago - the decision to go to war and the Florida recounty.


And my further point was most Republicans in the nation had NOTHING to do with any of that.

And yet - the democrats are looking to PROVOKE PEOPLE, ANNOY PEOPLE, AND GET IN THEIR FACES.


You know perfectly well what Im talking about.


I really don't care what your neighbors have done. Im sure I could find democrats in my town who have down horrible things - SHOULD I tell you that all your views are illegitimate because there are a few nuts in my town???


Seriously man.....


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 10:19 PM | Report abuse

"But Dupnick does, and I'm inclined to listen to someone who has been in the room with the assassin.'

I'm inclined to think you should acquaint yourself with the most basic facts, including the "Sheriff's" own admission today to Megyn Kelly that he is aware of NO FACTS suggesting that the crimes were inpired by political rhetoric.

And the fact that the perp invoked his right to silence and wasn't talking.

I'd wager on top of that, like TMW, that the idiot didn't interrogate the perp at all, and I've no doubt at all he is in federal custody and has been from an early point. And I can guarantee you that the FBI and DOJ would like to flay the moron for his unprofessional and outrageous public statements.

A hack as a county sheriff is nothing new. A hack who is this unprofessional, irresponsible, and politically motivated is a little unusual.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Hilarious!

This one's for BiinChi! (I'm pretty sure I got his 'nick wrong, but he's the only poster that i'm aware of from Chicago)

http://www.nbcchicago.com/traffic/transit/Man_Gets_Ticket_While_Paying_for_Parking_Chicago-112827249.html

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 10:24 PM | Report abuse

kevin: "The argument regarding tone boils down to the assertion that these are actors that would be mollified in the face of a softer, more rational, more dispassionate public dialog. And while I think that's an admirable goal, I don't think it dissuades crazy people. "

You're right, it doesn't dissuade crazy people.

BUT

Surely there are lines that should not be crossed. For instance, Steve Dreihaus had the directions to his house posted by political opponents, and so did Tom Perrillo. Why is this necessary? And couldn't it be dangerous? Both of these guys had small children at home. What would be the point of posting a home address unless it's to get people to go to their homes to confront and/or intimidate them? To me, this is beyond anything that should be tolerated by anyone on either side of the aisle.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 10:26 PM | Report abuse

And of course the whitewashing of the right kicks into high gear, as predictable.

A guy with (right wing) white supremacist affiliations and who consumes (right wing) hate literature and who fills online forums with (right wing) economic positions and who lives in a state where thanks to (right wing) politicians is able to easily buy and automatic pistol and uses it to execute a Democratic Congresswomen and a few buystanders for good measure .. oh, no, nothing to do with the right wing (hey, he also listed the Communist Manifesto, see? See?), pshaw, just a mentally ill lone wolf. Hey, look over there! A seagull!

So we hear that the racist signs at Tea Party rallies are held by left-wingers trying to make a pack of screaming red-faced extremists "look bad" (never mind Dale Robertson carrying such a sign hmself, the n-word charmingly misspelled, never mind that lack of daylight between the sign holders and the rest of the rally), we read that the regular posters on right-wing forums celebrating the shooting of Giffords are "left wing trolls," and, the cherry on top .. we're told that the Third Reich was left-wing.

OK, right-wingers don't do nuance, they need their good-guy-bad-guy delineations pure and pristine (businessman good, environmentalist bad, Republican freedom, Democrat tyranny), their membership includes people who don't handle details very well so, yeah, this is predictable.

But it's kind of galling when people well-educated enough to know better play along, fall into the "both sides do it" crap. It isn't true.

When Hillary Clinton suggested during the primaries in 2008 that there should be some time for the assassins to weigh in, she was blasted by liberals all over the country, lost supporters. And that was an oblique indiscretion and in no way hoping for or encouraging Obama's assassination.

When Palin posted her crosshairs map it was a direct suggestion to armed (right wing) partisans to clear the decks for easier Republican wins by killing Democrats in office. Wink wink. May we suggest a prescription. When Sharron Angle suggested bullet solutions if ballot ones failed, that was a direct insinuation that killing Reid was an acceptable tactic to help the teabaggers get into office.

And no it's not going to be the vice president at the bank who goes over the edge and shoots a Democrat, of course it's going to be some marginal nutjob loner with mental problems, some poor freak tormented by mental illness not of his own summoning but encouraged and motivated by the (right wing) rhetoric he hears on the radio every day.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 10:27 PM | Report abuse

LOL.. the guys/gals over at Hillbuzz have nicknamed Sheriff Dupnik "Grampa Munster".
That's funny - I don't care who you are.

On a more serious note I wonder how much of Pima County is controlled by the Mexican drug gangs. Any Pima locals here?

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 10:29 PM | Report abuse

Anyway, the democrats have been provoking people over the past year.


When Scott Brown won Massachusetts, and the polls showed that the American People did not want the health care law, it would have been wise for Obama to back off.


The same issue - the democrats lost the election in November, and pressed through with their liberal agenda.


NONE of that helps the political atmosphere in this country.

I suppose in a week, the little positive discussion from this incident will be forgotten.

We will be back to Ethan's mindless attacks and Cao's silly postings.


The Obama paid trolls will be gearing up again as the Obama people try to get a re-elect.

Hey, the Obama people might even try what they did before - which was EVERY SINGLE COMMENT ON THE WASHINGTON POST BLOGS GOT A MOCKING HOSTILE REPLY.


That doesn't help anything -


And the striking conclusion is: Even though Obama is black, it doesn't prove he is a good person.


All I see is a person who has done horrible damaging things to the political system in this nation,

And who has CAUSED damage to our Economy.


Obama still has little experience - and still is unqualified. The amount of LYING he has done has been incredible. I can not think of a person in US history whose actions in office are so different from what was promised during a campaign.


Obama has to go. If he resigns, the sooner the better for the country.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 10:32 PM | Report abuse

So Colonel Kurtz is against killing. Sometimes. Who knew.

Still not a good fiction writer, though.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 10:32 PM | Report abuse

@cao: "When Palin posted her crosshairs map it was a direct suggestion to armed (right wing) partisans to clear the decks for easier Republican wins by killing Democrats in office. Wink wink."

Goodness. That's so rational and well-reasoned, it . . . I can't imagine any other possible interpretation of events.

Well done, Cao. Well done.

"some poor freak tormented by mental illness not of his own summoning but encouraged and motivated by the (right wing) rhetoric he hears on the radio every day."

Well, don't stop there, cao. How do we solve that problem?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Cool, cao's here. That'll help.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 10:34 PM | Report abuse

@sue: "Surely there are lines that should not be crossed."

Sure, and for a variety of reasons. Some of them legal. Some of them having to do with existing laws regarding stalking, harassment, etc.

"For instance, Steve Dreihaus had the directions to his house posted by political opponents, and so did Tom Perrillo. Why is this necessary? And couldn't it be dangerous?"

It's not necessary, and it could definitely be dangerous. Often, violence isn't of the lone-whackjob type, but out of the intersection of passion, stress, and opportunity. There's no value in even trying to start a shout-out or a some form of public protest at people's private houses. Indeed, that's essentially trying to bully folks you don't agree with by intimidation. While the intention may not be violence, the intention is clearly to make people uncomfortable and even frightened and change their behavior in some way based on that. And that crosses the line.

"Both of these guys had small children at home. What would be the point of posting a home address unless it's to get people to go to their homes to confront and/or intimidate them?"

Releasing people's home addresses in such a context is, I would think, unambiguously harassment.

"To me, this is beyond anything that should be tolerated by anyone on either side of the aisle."

Agreed, 100%.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 10:39 PM | Report abuse

The shooter's (I chose to not use his name, less "fame") favorite books list doesn't look conservative to me, and college classmates say he's a lefty.

Certainly they have his computer, browser history and IP's - I wonder what websites he frequented?

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Kevin

People are downloading your program to ignore YOU.

Does that make any sense to spend ten hours doing?

Furthermore, one person on here tried to threaten you into posting ONLY comments that he found acceptable, or he would start to organize against you.

Im just pointing that that you really are feeding the uncivil behavior.

_________________


The point has been made - the democrats refuse to discuss things - the democrats have gone as far as ignoring people.


Now one nut has started shooting in Arizona.


Do you really think that ignoring people is the answer???

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 10:40 PM | Report abuse

@TrollMcWingnut: "Cool, cao's here. That'll help."

Yeah, I know, right?

It's like we're all young padwan learners and Yoda just showed up.

"In much danger, you are. The free market--it leads to profit. And profit leads to greed. And greed leads to talk radio. And talk radio leads to hate. And hate leads to mass murder. This is the way to dark side. Yes. Dark side."

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Goodness. That's so rational and well-reasoned, it . . . I can't imagine any other possible interpretation of events.

==

Oh, no, of course, it was just a metaphor. We need to "targhet" these people for .. for electoral defeat, that's all. I'm sure one of your indefatigable Google Gooroos could find plenty of instances of Democrats using the same metaphor.

Uh-huh.

Crap. Given all the guns flying around, given America's deplorable history of political assassination, Palin's map was, in the most generous interpretation possible, grotesquely irresponsible and in my unrequited opinion it was criminal incitement.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 10:42 PM | Report abuse

suekzoo,

Re.: Home addresses. Agreed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/16/class-warfare-hundreds-pr_n_578015.html?view=print

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 10:50 PM | Report abuse

The point has been made ALL YEAR that the democrats are attempting to govern WITHOUT the consent of the governed.

This is not acceptable in a democracy.

Clearly, people voted for Obama believing that he would be BIPARTISAN AND COMPROMISE. Because that is what Obama said during the campaign.


Pretty simple.

The democrats seemed intent on TWISTING the meaning of the 2008 election.

INSISTING ON TWISTING.


Somehow, the democrats think they should be able to do this, AND GET NO REACTION FROM ANYONE.


They are like criminals seeking to get away with their crimes - it is everyone else's fault.


And somehow the TEA PARTY is getting subjected to constant attacks - constant FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM

And we are supposed to sit here and not react???


This lame duck session was a disgrace - the democrats LOST the election - and here they are, pushing their agenda forward WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE.


This garbage that people like PARTS of the health care bill - well that does not include the COSTS.


People are concerned about the COSTS of the health care plan - the democrats dont seem to care


People are concerned about the DEBT - and the democrats dont seem to care.


People are concerned about Obama's 1.3 Trillion dollar deficit - the democrats dont seem to care.


However, after PROVOKING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, the democrats launch on a SMEAR campaign against their political opponents.


Time to understand all of this.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Kevin,

Got this link from AOSHQ. Had no idea that was the underlying premise behind the Alien franchise.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18932_alien-film-franchise-based-entirely-rape.html

And I only respond to the Yoda of episode's 4, 5 and 6. Episodes 1, 2 and 3 Yoda I discount as "satanic".

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 10:51 PM | Report abuse

Well, don't stop there, cao. How do we solve that problem?

==

I'm going to answer a question with another.

When Sharron Angle called for "Second Amendment solutions," why was she still allowed aboard commerical aircraft?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 10:52 PM | Report abuse

The truth is that Obama's people are now on a non-stop SMEAR campaign aimed at smearing Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

This has to have Obama's personal approval - or Obama could stop it immediately.

The QUESTION is clear: is this the kind of activity which the American People want the President of the United States to be involved in?


I find this smear campaign to be highly out-of-bounds. And for high government officials to be engaging in this conduct, it is unAmerican and has no place in our political system.


The American People should take note - I have to wonder if laws have been broken this weekend as the democrats, who are in control of the government, are conducting a smear campaign against their political opponents on the side.


All this has NO PLACE in a criminal investigation.


Obama is politicizing a criminal investigation - it has to be of questionable legality.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 10:53 PM | Report abuse

@TominColorado: "Certainly they have his computer, browser history and IP's - I wonder what websites he frequented?"

Probably jodiefoster.com . . .

Seriously, ideology (left or right) does not provoke murder and, not surprisingly, objective analysis of crazy people who start spraying crowds of innocent people with bullets often finds there's not a lot of clarity or consistency regarding ideology (or, often, theology). These people are messed up, and often going in a lot of directions at one time. In generally, they don't actually enjoy the kind of clarity a typical hyper-partisan right-winger or left-winger exhibits.

But, I may just be revealing my own biases. It seems entirely reasonable to me that somebody who would randomly murder folks over politics or movie stars or personal crushes is not going to have a great deal of mental and emotional clarity. Indeed, their interior life is probably going to be a hot mess.

But, I could be mistaken.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 10:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama has acted more like Nixon than any other person

Is there an enemies list???


This obsession that Obama has of smearing the Tea Party - name-calling - baseless false charges of racism.


It is disgraceful.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 10:56 PM | Report abuse

"Certainly they have his computer, browser history and IP's - I wonder what websites he frequented?"

Time will tell. There's also been some tentative connections made from the shooter to American Renaissance and to the "teachings" of David Wynn Miller, both right-fringe.

I don't think anyone has enough information to know, or draw any certain conclusions, what motivated this young man. Obviously, he was troubled, and people around him recognized that he was "off." Beyond that is a guess that helps no one.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 10:57 PM | Report abuse

no try, do or do not do
no woman, do, no cry

i ♥ yoda marley

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 11:01 PM | Report abuse

But, I may just be revealing my own biases. It seems entirely reasonable to me that somebody who would randomly murder folks over politics

==

But it's hardly "random."

With billions of dollars being spent on a hate and fear industry the inclination is going to land on the objects of that hate and fear. And the right wing hate industry has nothing remotely comparable on the other side.

Olbermann doesn't do crosshairs. Leftwingers don't make a fetish out of guns. Even gun-advocate groups one would expect to be left wing like the Pink Pistols turn out of be libertarian.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 11:02 PM | Report abuse

tao,

I called a foul on that at the time. It's scary sh*t, and unacceptable.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 11:02 PM | Report abuse

With a about 60 million gun owners having about 200 million guns in the US, I doubt if the right or left will need subtle symbols like the bullseyes (DNC) or crosshairs (Palin) to know which politicians to get if they go insane like this guy did.

Hopefully with the shooter's browsing history we'll be able to tell if he ever saw either.

The 2007 letter from Giffords campaign found in his safe today predates Palin's map and the start of the tea parties movement.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 11:05 PM | Report abuse

"When Sharron Angle called for "Second Amendment solutions," why was she still allowed aboard commerical aircraft?"

1st Amendment.

Really! You can look it up!

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 11:05 PM | Report abuse

cao,

based on your statements, shouldn't there be more violence?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Quit being flip, tao. People are put on no-fly lists for much milder reasons than that and you know it.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 11:08 PM | Report abuse

@cao: "When Sharron Angle called for 'Second Amendment solutions,' why was she still allowed aboard commerical aircraft?"

Because she wasn't boarding them with weapons? I don't know of any regulation that would have prevented her from boarding aircraft.

To quoth the Angle: "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."

I dunno about you, but that seemed like a threat to Harry Reid. The question might be why she was allowed within 30 yards of Harry Reid, after that.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Needle someone else, Troll, I'm not in the mood. Bye.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 11:11 PM | Report abuse

@Troll: re: The Alien Franchise.

Good golly. It certainly is. And includes a lot of stuff for oral fetishists, as well, from the whole laying eggs thing to reanimating Bishop (just recall the visual of that), only just his head, to interrogate him.

Good golly. Everything just sorta clicked about that film.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 11:14 PM | Report abuse

@ this point kayo, I think flips all y'all are gonna get here.

At least from this bloody Jesuit.

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 11:15 PM | Report abuse

"Needle someone else, Troll, I'm not in the mood. Bye."

Ok. Have a nice day :-)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 11:16 PM | Report abuse

@cao: "Needle someone else, Troll, I'm not in the mood. Bye."

Good for you. As a wise muppet once said: "Wars not make one great.”

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 11:16 PM | Report abuse

"Good for you. As a wise muppet once said: "Wars not make one great.”"

I was gonna use that line! How about, "Mine! Or I will tell you not."

And the Alien thing was a complete surprise, but makes perfect sense after I read it.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 11:22 PM | Report abuse

kevin: "I dunno about you, but that seemed like a threat to Harry Reid. The question might be why she was allowed within 30 yards of Harry Reid, after that. "

Anyone outside of politics probably could have filed for a restraining order and gotten it. Not that those always do what they are intended to do, though...

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 11:26 PM | Report abuse

I dunno about you, but that seemed like a threat to Harry Reid. The question might be why she was allowed within 30 yards of Harry Reid, after that.

==

Because she wasn't threatening to shoot him herself, she was right on the edge of recruiting someone else to do it.

And it someone had indeed "taken out" Harry Reid, even someone who wrote Angle and said here's that second amendment solution you were asking for, and told the cops he'd been explicitly prompted by Angle's words, she would have dismissed it as "just an electoral metaphor" and disclaimed any responsibility for the consequences of her words, and blogs like this one would have been loaded with the usual apologia and dismissed the guy as just another disturbed loner, up to and including defending his assassination with Reid's voting records and a lot of big talk about "socialist agenda" this and that.

And Angle would have won election anyway.

No fly list? She should have been arrested. Criminal incitement isn't free speech. If you publish a classified ad offering to pay someone for a murder watch how far the First Amendment takes you in court.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 11:29 PM | Report abuse

Shooter is also a 9/11 Troofer: http://bit.ly/graejA

I haven't been to any tea parties rallys but I don't they or Palin are Troofers

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 11:33 PM | Report abuse

cao,

Is your assertion that Angle was intentionally recruiting somebody to assisinate Harry Reid, and failed?

Further, is it also your assertion that had she succeeded she would have won the election?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 11:37 PM | Report abuse

I don't know if this will make any sense or not but whether or not this kid had any political affiliation or not, seems unlikely to me that he did, I think it's still pertinent to discuss the political atmosphere as it exists today.

Someone mentioned AZ probably not being any different today or tomorrow than it was pre the anti-illegal immigration legislation. I don't believe that, I think legislation that clearly causes people to leave the only home they've ever known and fear their neighbors and public officials has a very negative and frightening effect on a community. The very nature of the immigration debate brings out the worst in some and I think people lose their perspective. Add into the mix all the gun metaphors and I think it's time for community leaders to really evaluate their positions and how they portray both their own position and their opponents.

This is really anecdotal but the small town I live in here in CA decided out of the blue to pass a resolution in support of the Arizona bill. I attend most council meetings and after 30 years I've seen just about everything under the sun of small city politics, but nothing compared to the heat of that meeting. I saw people I've know for half of my adult life act like complete strangers and Hispanic neighbors and friends recoil in disgust.

I don't agree with everything the Sheriff said but I can understand the sentiment that things may have changed for the worse.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 9, 2011 11:40 PM | Report abuse

So, plenty of words that RNC DNC etc can't use anymore: target, battleground, hold-our-fire, take-out, ad blitzes, air wars, offensives, and trenches to name a few.

Will it still be OK to call it a "campaign" or do we have to call it a contest now or what ?

Posted by: TominColorado | January 9, 2011 11:50 PM | Report abuse

TominColorado

You're not helping the debate here by digging for evidence that he is a lefty. Most of us already agree that he's probably suffering from some form of psychosis, that's not to say he isn't still responsible for his actions. I read the call to arms from the Tea Party guy to "blame the left before they blame us", we're trying to get beyond that framing here, at least some of us. The point remains however, that our words do matter, and maybe it's time people dropped some of the anti-government, call to arms rhetoric. If that means I have to give up my "rich people suck" routine I'm game.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 9, 2011 11:52 PM | Report abuse

"...if the Arizona gunman had shouted "Allahu Akhbar!" and left a YouTube manifesto proclaiming his intention to gun down a Congresswoman in pursuit of jihad and in honor of Bin Laden, the media would stil be scratching its collective head as to his motivation.

"But since he left jumbled lunatic ravings, they know Sarah Palin is to blame."

heh

{{{Stolen in full from Tom McGuire: http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/
Paraphrasing Byron York}}}

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Well thank heavens the illegal aliens are on the wrong side of the law so it's still cool to dump on them. With bigotry against blacks no longer cool and gays "openly" in the military, the bigots are feeling cornered. Running out of targets.

Maybe we'll have to revive that secular humanist thing.

Worth repeating .. illegals come here to work and wouldn't come without jobs, jobs mostly in agro and mostly for companies with Republican owners. Funny, though, we don't see any red faces or bared teeth over those employers who bring them here. Pillars of the community.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 11:59 PM | Report abuse

"But since he left jumbled lunatic ravings, they know Sarah Palin is to blame."

==

And if Palin hadn't done that crosshairs map explcitly naming Giffords as a target her name wouldn't have come up in connection at all.

You're being deliberately dense. Or maybe you're just dumb.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 12:03 AM | Report abuse

Imsinca:

When this first broke yesterday morning Dems were immediately on the air claiming first he was a US Army Afghanistan vet (nope) and immediately tagging him as motivate by tea party and Pain (no evidence yet). Meanwhile plenty of thing we do know, which I'm listing.

Similarly, when car bomb found in NY, Bloomberg immediately speculated that it was somebody disgruntled with the health care bill (nope)

Ft. Hood shooting? immediate speculation for a PTSD vet (nope).

I'm not aware of a tea parties call to blame the left first. If there is it was too late from what I've seen.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 12:08 AM | Report abuse

That map used a SURVEYOR's symbol, not a rifle scope crosshair.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 12:09 AM | Report abuse

The 9/11 truthers are as much a product of the libertarian right fringe, as any other "political" group.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 12:09 AM | Report abuse

"And if Palin hadn't done that crosshairs map explcitly naming Giffords as a target her name wouldn't have come up in connection at all.

You're being deliberately dense. Or maybe you're just dumb."

Well, Kos "Bullseyed" Giffords as well. He's just as guilty, no

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 10, 2011 12:09 AM | Report abuse

Most of us already agree that he's probably suffering from some form of psychosis

==

Excuse me, but that's trivial, like saying that someone who committed suicide might have been depressed.

It's not an explanation at all, it's a prerequisute.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Tom: the 9/11 Truthers are as much a product of the libertarian right fringe as any other supposed political group.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 12:15 AM | Report abuse

"That map used a SURVEYOR's symbol, not a rifle scope crosshair. "

Nice try. Palin called it a "bulls eye" right after the election. The change to "surveyor's symbol" was just today.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 12:18 AM | Report abuse

"illegal aliens are on the wrong side of the law..."

Homeric

Posted by: tao9 | January 10, 2011 12:18 AM | Report abuse

"Well, Kos "Bullseyed" Giffords as well. He's just as guilty, no"


What I've seen from kos is a list of people to consider for a primary and she was on it. I did not see any imagery of bulls eyes, targets, or anything else. If you have a link to an image, post it.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 12:23 AM | Report abuse

Sue:

I think that 9/11 Troofers (who blame Bush/Cheney for WTC & Pentagon attacks) are left fringe.

But the Birfers and Obama-is-a-muslim guys... I'll give ya the right fringe on them.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 12:24 AM | Report abuse

"Excuse me, but that's trivial, like saying that someone who committed suicide might have been depressed."

cao, the point is who knows what the hell was going through his head or why he did it. I agree all the bullsh!t 2nd amendment remedies and treading politics like target practice is toxic, but the guy is still responsible for his own actions. I'm not going to start blaming someone else every time some lunatic fires a gun. I did say this morning that SP made a big mistake though and she'll suffer for her chart whether that's fair or not I don't really care that much, it's her bed not mine.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 10, 2011 12:25 AM | Report abuse

I betchya that on tomorrows column, teh Krug denounces himself.  Or, blames Palin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/opinion/18krugman.html?ref=opinion

Sue,

I thought the horror was the eliminationist rhetoric? What is "bullseyeing" if not eliminationist?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 10, 2011 12:30 AM | Report abuse

Tom: "I think that 9/11 Troofers (who blame Bush/Cheney for WTC & Pentagon attacks) are left fringe."

Uh...go google libertarian+9/11+truthers. Also go take a look at Alex Jones, who is a major name in the Truthers arena, and a Rand and Ron Paul supporter.

Here's a few places to start:

http://www.libertarianrepublican.net/2008/05/911-truthers-push-libertarian.html

http://www.libertariansforjustice.org/?q=node/26

http://www.examiner.com/la-county-libertarian-in-los-angeles/tom-tancredo-sheriff-joe-arpaio-virgil-goode-endorse-a-9-11-truther-for-governor-of-california

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/150798
(911 truth movement is hurting libertarians)

http://theconservativemonster.com/2010/09/23/libertarians-and-911-truthers-applaud-ahmadinejads-un-speech.aspx

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 12:32 AM | Report abuse

suezoo,

The creep had his wires crossed re: Rep. Giffords, in 2007.

" "A safe at Mr. Loughner's home contained a form letter from Ms. Giffords' office thanking him for attending a 2007 "Congress on your Corner'' event in Tucson. The safe also held an envelope with handwritten notes, including the name of Ms. Giffords, as well as "I planned ahead," "My assassination," and what appeared to be Mr. Loughner's signature, according to an FBI affidavit. "
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071191163461466.html

The usual a$$wypes had their blood libel out into the ether 15 minutes after the incident hit the wires: HuffPo, Benen, Krugman(!), Kos, FireDog.

They possessed instead of patience and insight only what they brought into the situation themselves:

And that was hate, bad faith, and malicious dishonesty.

Punks, all.

Posted by: tao9 | January 10, 2011 12:36 AM | Report abuse

"Bull's eye" is more associated with arrows or darts than guns.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 12:36 AM | Report abuse

I doubt Palin is anything like reflective enough to feel any shame or chastening for Giffords' assassination attempt. She'll work to deflect any blame and go right on hooting and howling and winking. To hell with Sarah Palin. And no I'm not saying that the shooter was nothing but a conduit, the pharmacist who filled Palin's "prescription," of course he's the one who pulled the trigger, but you don't let so direct an incitement as Palin's go unmentioned and you don't ignore the despicable irresponsibility of advocacy like hers, not in this country, not after all the assassinations in US history.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 12:39 AM | Report abuse

@tao9: and it took you punks even less time to crank up the usual deflections. You uh people were calling him a lefty before the ambulance got there.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 12:45 AM | Report abuse

At least she's never called for all liberals to be gassed.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 12:45 AM | Report abuse

Tao:

I think the left has this blood libel canned and ready for when one of these sadly inevitable events occur.

I suppose someday they'll get their wish and it will be white Republican veteran, but this shooter doesn't fit that bill.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 12:49 AM | Report abuse

tao: "The creep had his wires crossed re: Rep. Giffords, in 2007."

Yes, dear, I know. :o)

I am not, and have not, associated the shooter with Palin or the recent rhetoric. From what I have seen, he had a mish-mash of weird conspiracy theories and fringe ideas rattling around in his head, some associated with the left and some with the right. Major confusion. No doubt ill. No doubt needing help and maybe medication.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 12:50 AM | Report abuse

If someone shoots Sarah Palin, then we can blame Chris Fox.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 12:52 AM | Report abuse

tao

At least it took most people on this board a couple of hours to start blaming each other and everyone else.

cao

You have your way and I have mine. I'm too tired to argue about it anymore. Peace

Posted by: lmsinca | January 10, 2011 12:54 AM | Report abuse

Sue:

Interesting links, thanks. So Paulians have "troofers" too, figures I guess.

I know a few Libertarians (one thinks the moon landings were faked too!), no Paulians.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 12:56 AM | Report abuse

"...you uh people..." Nope. Not this bloody Jesuit. Didn't happen.

You got a holodeck at the HoHut?

Or are you hanging out with the Castenada's again?

Posted by: tao9 | January 10, 2011 12:58 AM | Report abuse

The point is that there’s room in a democracy for people who ridicule and denounce those who disagree with them; there isn’t any place for eliminationist rhetoric, for suggestions that those on the other side of a debate must be removed from that debate by whatever means necessary.

And it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.

*Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right*. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Representative Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the G.O.P.

And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will.""

-- "punk" Krugman

Call out the damage control squads

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 12:59 AM | Report abuse

Linda Lopez (D-Arizona) one of the first out of the gate this time, h/t Hillbuzz.org:

http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/09/democrat-linda-lopez-owes-americans-an-apology-was-driving-force-behind-lefts-attempt-to-blame-tea-party-for-assassination-attempt-on-gabrielle-giffords/

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 1:02 AM | Report abuse

tao,

In case you don't recall, go look at yesterday's thread when you were calling for prayers and nothing more, and I echoed you a couple of times.

If you wish to paint me with the "all the liberals" brush, then go right ahead. I know what I have posted and what I have not.

It's pretty obvious at this point that this perp is not a neat and tidy package. Anyone trying to stuff him into a slot is foolish, lefties or righties.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 1:03 AM | Report abuse

lms,

I know, and everyone was mostly saddened and shocked. One can say intemperate stuff at that point.

But the most intemperate here took their lead from the professional-left punks referred above. That was a bad choice because they didn't just get the story wrong, they manufactured a narrative that was just basic bullshot out of their merdeholes.

Posted by: tao9 | January 10, 2011 1:08 AM | Report abuse

wrt Krugman, wow really?...

O'Reilly and Beck joking about shooting politicians and beheading journalists?

Doubt it. I catch O'Reilly a couple times a week and haven't seen that. Haven't seen Beck other than when he's on O'Reilly.

If Krugman doesn't have transcripts of that there will be some fur flying tomorrow.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 1:11 AM | Report abuse

Uh oh. Reid utilizes eliminationist rhetoric. Houston, we have no equivalence.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0111/Reid_to_Cantor_Stop_throwing_these_bombs.html

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 10, 2011 1:11 AM | Report abuse

Thanks for the dialog guys.
Time for bed, 11:15 here now and my regular 05:00 wakeup awaits.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 1:15 AM | Report abuse

suezoo,

No, I noticed and was glad we (and others)were together on that. Sorry I didn't say so last night.

I appreciate your posts, sometimes I agree, sometimes not. No paint brush for you Sue. ;>)

Posted by: tao9 | January 10, 2011 1:16 AM | Report abuse

suekzoo,

No, I saw your posts, and was glad we (and others here) were together on that.

I appreciate all your posts, agree sometimes, sometimes not. No paint brush for you Sue. ;>)

Posted by: tao9 | January 10, 2011 1:22 AM | Report abuse

Thanks, tao. Appreciate that.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 10, 2011 1:34 AM | Report abuse

whoa wierd disappearing edited double zoo post above
--------------------------------------------------------------

The point is that there’s room in a democracy for people who ridicule and denounce those who disagree with them; there isn’t any place for eliminationist rhetoric, for suggestions that those on the other side of a debate must be removed from that debate by whatever means necessary.
{...}
Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 12:59 AM | Report abuse
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{...}
Conservatives should be collectively gassed.
Posted by: caothien9 | December 20, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OK!

1) Sockpuppet
2) Drunk
3) thaiStik
4) Bi-Polar
5) All of the Above

flip
===============

Goodnight Mrs Calabash wherever you are...

Posted by: tao9 | January 10, 2011 1:44 AM | Report abuse

Great article. Reading the comments is depressing though. It's hardly surprising that the attempted assassination of a politician would become political. That's the very nature of assassination no matter how deranged or lucid the perpetrator. I think the far left and the far right both have their crazies, the difference being right now is that the far right has more power in the Republican party than the extreme left has in the Democratic party. Democrats can still get away with ignoring the rabble at places like Kos and Firedog Lake. At this time Republicans don't seem to feel they have that luxury, thus a concerned Senator who feels he must remain anonymous. This is a problem for governance. When extreme elements of either party get too much power they become bullies. Note the far Right's response to the lame duck session. The bills passed in December from DADT repeal and tax deal, to START and the 911 responders bill were popular with the public. I only hope that the Republicans who voted for these bills won't be forsaken by their party.

Posted by: samc3 | January 10, 2011 2:01 AM | Report abuse

"...you uh people..." Nope. Not this bloody Jesuit. Didn't happen.

==

OK, granted, you specifically didn't post that the guy was a lefty and to your credit posted about praying for Giffords' recovery.

Apologies for the breadth of the brush, it's just that I so rarely have cause to trim it. Whose fault is that?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 2:32 AM | Report abuse

The usual a$$wypes had their blood libel out into the ether 15 minutes after the incident hit the wires: HuffPo, Benen, Krugman(!), Kos, FireDog.

==

Libel? What did they say that was libelous? I read the Krugman article, everything he said was perfectly true.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 2:43 AM | Report abuse

Great article. Reading the comments is depressing though. It's hardly surprising that the attempted assassination of a politician would become political. That's the very nature of assassination no matter how deranged or lucid the perpetrator.

==

Hmmm.

In April of last year Janet Napolitano issued a warning that right wing hate groups were multiplying and being increasingly more open in their rhetoric. She was reviled and derided and charges of bias were leveled. True to form, the Obama administration backed down.

Since Obama won election the "water the tree of liberty" talk has reached volume not seen in a century if ever. Gun sales and ammo sales have skyrocketed. Unvarnished calls for the assassination of Democrats and ideologically impure Republicans are all over the right wing blogosphere.

Sometimes it's just colorful language for "vote them out of office." Not always. Before the midterms last November there were calls to keep Democratic candidates from leaving their homes, piling on the death threats so they would have to run their campaigns from their basements between peeks through the venetian blinds.

And two Republicans, one a US Senate nominee in Nevada and the other a former governor and not much of anything politically but a rabble-rouser, spoke and wrote openly of "targeting" and "taking out" Democrats in language that would have be wildly embellished and contrived in interpretation to take as anything but calls to murder.

And one of the people whose assassination was encouraged took a bullet yesterday.

It's political for a reason.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 2:52 AM | Report abuse

"But [Loughner] is very much a part of a widespread squall of fear, anger and intolerance that has produced violent threats against scores of politicians and infected the political mainstream with violent imagery. With easy and legal access to semiautomatic weapons like the one used in the parking lot, those already teetering on the edge of sanity can turn a threat into a nightmare.

Last spring, Capitol security officials said threats against members of Congress had tripled over the previous year, almost all from opponents of health care reform. An effigy of Representative Frank Kratovil Jr., a Maryland Democrat, was hung from a gallows outside his district office. Ms. Giffords’s district office door was smashed after the health vote, possibly by a bullet.

The federal judge who was killed, John Roll, had received hundreds of menacing phone calls and death threats, especially after he allowed a case to proceed against a rancher accused of assaulting 16 Mexicans as they tried to cross his land. This rage, stirred by talk-radio hosts, required marshals to give the judge and his family 24-hour protection for a month. Around the nation, threats to federal judges have soared for a decade.

It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. *But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge.* Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10mon1.html?ref=opinion

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 2:55 AM | Report abuse

It's getting embarrassing to be a white guy. Why is it always white males who wack out and assassinate and commit mass murders. Not being nasty or snarky just seriously curious if anybody knows the answer.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 9, 2011 8:40 PM
-----

Did you forget the guy who wigged out and shot all those people on the MTA a few years ago---Colin something? The Fort Hood shooter?

Posted by: Brigade | January 10, 2011 6:35 AM | Report abuse

Which forces the broader question, despite one’ s political leanings, are we now to be wary of those individual­s who differ with a point of view to the point of violence? If history is a guide- it seems yes ( from the civil war in the 1860′s, the assassinat­ions of various US presidents­, the violent usurping of student protests in the 60 and 70′s fighting for civil rights and our pull out from Vietnam). As much as we prefer open discussion and gentleman discussion­s on night time TV that (cynically­) entertains us and relieves us personally of having to force change in society it has often come down in history to violent confrontat­ions, the pitting of entrenched interests and those who seek justice. 

Although Jared Lee Loughton was seeking justice in his own eyes, he has only ended up committing violent and reprehensi­ble damage, one has to wonder – has American politics now come down to physical confrontat­ions, the actions of a supposed single ‘mad man’ in this instance or the logical extension of polemical politics in America laden with distrust, unease, smear campaigns, acts of vandalism or perhaps anti government rhetoric that have gone from your Bill O Reilly TV room to your bloody Arizonian Saturday morning shopping mall?

http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2011/01/the-violent-arrival-of-polemic-politics-arizona-and-beyond/

Posted by: zoezoe123 | January 10, 2011 6:47 AM | Report abuse

Bernie in reply to your comment at 8:10 PM

The US can not be compared to "other western nations"


First of all, the US is a nation of immigrants - and the US has taken in all different kinds of people - we have everyone here.

The most "settled" people ended up staying behind and did not come here.


In a sense, we still have a frontier culture. One can not have a frontier nation for hundreds of years, and then suddenly take those qualities out of a nation.


In those comparisons, people love to compare the US to a nordic country which is frozen over most of the year - where most people are inside half the year.


____________________________


Im just saying - if one takes the "inner cities" and the gang violence out of the numbers - the homocide rates and rates of violence are much lower.


Yea - take out the gang violence and what is going on in the inner cities - and one might find a relatively peaceful US.


_________________________


WHAT the liberals want to do is take the guns out of the suburbs and other areas in which guns are used primarily for protection and hunting.


INNER CITIES - no law is going to take the guns out of the inner cities. In fact, most of those guns are ALREADY illegal.

So, to pass a law which causes legal guns to become illegal - WHILE AT THE SAME TIME that same law will be INEFFECTIVE in the inner cities is just silly.


WHAT the liberals really want are laws which are FOCUSED on the inner cities - to solve the problems there - while leaving the rest the population out of the gun restrictions.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 6:57 AM | Report abuse

The basic truth here is we have a situation in this nation in which the country heard a great deal of REASSURING WORDS from the democrats in 2008.

AND then Obama and the democrats upon taking office turned around and ACTED in ways which were completely OPPOSITE to what they had promised the nation.

AND the promises to engage the other side - and TALK about the issues, the DEMOCRATS WITHDREW FROM ALL OF THAT. The democrats immediately took the attitude that "they had the votes, and they didn't need to talk or compromise or be bipartisan in any way" Even on this blog, honest attempts to talk about issues have been met by persistent insistence from the democrats that they will not entertain ideas from the other side - I many times believe that these efforts are LED BY OBAMA PAID BLOGGERS, OR PAID BY OTHER OTHER GROUPS ON THE LEFT.

This is SERIOUS.


There is a sense in this nation that the GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN HIJACKED.

There is a sense in this nation that the democrats are OUT-OF-CONTROL.

There is a sense in the nation that the spending of Obama is so OUT-OF-CONTROL that there will be PERMANENT DAMAGE TO THIS NATION.


____________________________


Obama has stated his desire to make PERMANENT CHANGES to this nation with his temporary majorites.

The truth is that Obama is DOING PERMANENT DAMAGE TO THIS NATION BEFORE HE GETS VOTED OUT.


The Reassuring Language was IMMEDIATELY ABANDONED BY OBAMA - take Woodward's book as one example - the reassuring language on Afghanistan of Obama in the debates was IMMEDIATELY replaced with efforts to make major changes in the war AGAINST the advice of the Pentagon Generals.


Reassuances of bipartisanship - Obama followed through with these promises with a marked LACK of meetings and discussions with Republican leaders.


______________________


This has all led to PROVOCATIVE ACTIONS FROM THE DEMOCRATS


The health care law was passed AFTER the Scott Brown victory

NEVER in American history has major social legislation been passed through Reconciliation - and WITHOUT significant support from BOTH parties.

___________________


Again, the PROMISES OF RESTRAINT FROM OBAMA IN 2008 turned into "in your face" attitudes from the democrats.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 7:18 AM | Report abuse

What we are witnessing is Right Wing political correctness at an extreme level. Here's what I saw from the vantage point of this blog: Many of the regulars were here discussing other matters when a terrible event took place. Mass murder, an attempted political assassination of a U.S. Congresswoman, a 9 year-old girl killed, a Federal judge murdered. Like most, I knew nothing about the event but was horrified and compelled to learn more information. Tao, one of the regular Conservatives here, posted a link to the local AZ TV station which gave up-to-the-minute updates. I and others attempted to share all informations with the others here. Nearly everyone here was horrified and fixated n learning what happened. While that was happening, a couple of the regular Conservatives here attempted repeatedly to change the subject. They immediately tried to minimize the significance of the event, even before they had any idea what had happened. These Conservative regulars became hyper-vigilant immediately scouring for any hint that the Right Wing was at fault or to blame. Some Conservatives here openly blamed Obama and the Democrats and Liberals for creating a poisoned political atmosphere that led to the shootings. I got disgusted and left. When I returned the next morning I reviewed the entire thread. What I saw was a frightening display of Right Wing psychopathy. Nothing but preemptive attacks and false claims of victimhood. Not a shred of compassion or decency, nothing but political machinations rejecting all blame and responsibility for Conservatives and Conservative policies. A hideous, disgusting display. Look at the comment thread yourself if you like.

The Right Wing's grip on this country is so tight we are not even permitted to question whether there is a link between Conservative rhetoric and the assassin's actions. That is political correctness at its absolute worst. And what it says about the majority of Conservatives posting comments here is for others to decide for themselves. I know what I think.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 10, 2011 7:30 AM | Report abuse

A key element in the Republican catechism is that government is to be feared and distrusted, even though there are little actual grounds for this. This is put about even by high end Republican commentators like Will and Brooks. But the paranoia of ill people like the Tucson shooter is fed by such assertions.

The Republicans' hyperbolic, reckless talk about the dangers of government are responsible for this tragedy.

Posted by: rhallnj | January 10, 2011 7:32 AM | Report abuse

Obama and the democrats - with their words and actions - have CREATED THE PROVOCATIVE ATMOSPHERE in this nation.

I understand this may be rooted in their desire "to get even" for the Florida recount, and the fact that they didn't like the Iraq War.

(One has to point out that the democrats in Congress DID vote for the Iraq War and if the democrats in the Senate all voted against the war, they could have stopped it at the beginning)


_______________________


We have an atmosphere in this country in which the American People DO NOT want the health care bill, the democrats LOST the election in Massachusetts, but they are JAMMING IT THROUGH ANYWAY.


We have an atmosphere in this country in which this JAMMING is accompanied by FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM.

People who disagree with Obama on the SPENDING ASPECTS of health care - are met with FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM - IN A NATION-WIDE CAMPAIGN AGAINST POLITICAL OPPONENTS.


________________


We have the NAACP pulling the same garbage this summer, and then again this fall by trying to release a report in the middle of an election.


Obama and the democrats have SUPPORTED AND ENCOURAGED all this provocative behavior


INFLAMMATORY LANGUAGE has been coming from the Obama people over the last two years - all in sharp contrast to the reassuring words of 2008 when bipartisanship and compromise was promised.


_________________________


The lame duck session - AGAIN the democrats LOSE the election, and they START JAMMING AGAIN - all AGAINST the will of the American People.


Then, over this weekend - ALL we hear from the democrats are ATTEMPTS TO BLAME SARAH PALIN AND THE TEA PARTY.


The Obama people practically immediately read their emails and started blogging - attempting to pin blame on the TEA PARTY


This behavior has NO PLACE IN OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM.


Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 7:33 AM | Report abuse

"AND the promises to engage the other side - and TALK about the issues, the DEMOCRATS WITHDREW FROM ALL OF THAT."

You're serious, right?

All that Max Baucus stuff, and the total abandonment of a public option... that was a total withdrawal from Republican ideas?

You realize of course that the bill that got passed is almost identical to the plan submitted *by Republicans* as a counter to Clinton's plan, right?

If not, I have to sincerely hope that your body finds a way to follow your mind into whatever universe it currently inhabits.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 10, 2011 7:33 AM | Report abuse

Agree 100%, I Spent my Sunday making this to cope with my anger and sadness over the tragedy over the weekend:

http://youtu.be/TV2TJ6SjwK0

Pretty much worked non-stop, when the day was coming to an end I realized I hadn't eaten for 30 straight hours!
Hope you like it and pass along.
-Ryan

Posted by: RyanC1384 | January 10, 2011 7:35 AM | Report abuse

"Nice try. Palin called it a "bulls eye" right after the election. The change to "surveyor's symbol" was just today."

Nope, sorry buy you're flatly wrong. It is a survey symbol used to mark points on maps. You can look it up, and it's quite clear that's what it is.

And that was brought out at the time. You can google that up if you feel like it, too. But the truth has never been an issue for the left-wing media noise machine. It just became one of the thousands of falsehoods repeated a thousand times a day by the left.

As for Palin referring to it as a bullseye, first, I doubt that's true, and second it obviously isn't a bullseye.

If you want to see actual bullseyes placed over Republican areas, you'll have to go to the DNC. Their complete with pictures of "targetted" Republicans.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 10, 2011 7:48 AM | Report abuse

What the Obama people did on Saturday SHOULD BE ILLEGAL.


For the party in control of the government - to take a crime like this and IMMEDIATELY start to use is as a VEHICLE TO SMEAR THEIR POLITICAL OPPONENTS - is a disgrace to America


This is the stuff of a third-world country, not America.


AND OBAMA IS TO BLAME FOR THAT, he certainly did NOTHING to stop this blame attack.


______________________

The FALSE CHARGES this weekend are just like the FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM we have been hearing from the Obama people for years.

And then incredibly, without any sense of self-awareness, we have the Obama people complaining about the political atmosphere in this nation.


Obama has PERSONAL RESONSIBILITY FOR THIS INCIDENT.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 7:50 AM | Report abuse

Screen cap of Palin's "bullseye tweet" (the original may or may not be there):

http://yfrog.com/h464efp
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 10, 2011 7:51 AM | Report abuse

What you're saying RFR, is that you (and those you admire, politically) are the victims, here.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 10, 2011 7:54 AM | Report abuse

cao already posted this from the NT Times Editorial but it is worth repeating:

"It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people.

That whirlwind has touched down most forcefully in Arizona, which Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik described after the shooting as the capital of “the anger, the hatred and the bigotry that goes on in this country.” Anti-immigrant sentiment in the state, firmly opposed by Ms. Giffords, has reached the point where Latino studies programs that advocate ethnic solidarity have actually been made illegal.

Its gun laws are among the most lenient, allowing even a disturbed man like Mr. Loughner to buy a pistol and carry it concealed without a special permit. That was before the Tucson rampage. Now, having seen first hand the horror of political violence, Arizona should lead the nation in quieting the voices of intolerance, demanding an end to the temptations of bloodshed, and imposing sensible controls on its instruments."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10mon1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Posted by: wbgonne | January 10, 2011 7:57 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian in reply to your comment at 7:33 AM


I am 100% serious


The health care vote should have NEVER been taken in such an atmosphere.


NO major social legislation should be passed through "reconciliation"


AND the democrats are wrong to PROVOKE people the way they have over the past 2 years.


You have noticed that the nation is ANGRY at the democrats, haven't you???

The democrats have been asked multiple times to BACK OFF AND BRING CALM TO THE NATION.

What do the democrats do?


More False Charges of Racism, more "in your face" attitude

ANOTHER lame duck session in which the democrats are JAMMING through things AFTER they lose an election.


THERE is NO SENSE in the nation that the people are in charge of THEIR government. The democrats have HIJACKED THE GOVERNMENT.


The liberal agenda does not own the government - the AMERICAN PEOPLE DO.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 7:58 AM | Report abuse

"THE SHOOTING in Arizona, which left six people dead and gravely injured Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, is a horrifying tragedy. The temptation will be, as Arizona and the nation mourn the dead and hope for the recovery of the wounded, to infuse the terrible attack with broader political meaning - to blame the actions of the alleged 22-year-old gunman, Jared Lee Loughner, on a vitriolic political culture laced with violent metaphors and ugly attacks on opponents. Maybe. But metaphors don't kill people - guns kill people. Politicians should choose their words with care and keep debate civil, but it seems an unsupported leap to blame either the political climate or any particular individual or group for inciting the gunman. The suspect appears to be a disturbed young man with no coherent political philosophy."

Metaphors don't kill people. That's cute. Guns kill people, says the Post. But that, of course, is mistaken too. Neither metaphors nor guns alone kill people. But people with guns kills people. Ad mentally ill people with guns incited to political violence kill political people. Of course, maybe the Post has to write that b/c it provides a regular forum for a stable of Right WIng haters.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 10, 2011 8:04 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian in reply to your comment at 7:54 AM


Obama and the democrats have been PROVOKING people for 2 years now, and dragging down the political atmophere.

This has been all in sharp contrast to Obama's promises to be bipartisan and seek compromise.


Obama is the BAIT AND SWITCH GUY.

The False Charges of Racism coming from the democrats over the past two years have been INFLAMMATORY.


The efforts by the Obama people to blame the Tea Party - JUST ANOTHER SET OF FALSE CHARGES.


_____________________

The democrats are going to have to take a long, hard look at themselves.


If Obama and the democrats had STUCK TO THEIR 2008 PROMISES OF BIPARTISANSHIP AND COMPROMISE, people would not be so angry.


sorry, but that this the TRUTH.


GO AHEAD, KEEP ON GETTING IN PEOPLE'S FACES

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 8:04 AM | Report abuse

link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/09/AR2011010904022.html

Posted by: wbgonne | January 10, 2011 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Well, RFR, it seems to me that you don't want a discussion beyond "Here's why I'm right, and I'm waiting for you to agree with me." That's not gonna fly.

Republicans had lots of input to the ACA, started with the special bi-partisan committee headed by Max Baucus. The reason reconciliation was used was because the most obstructionist Senate in U.S. history (I'll wait while you look up the number of filibusters throughout history) would not allow an up-or-down vote of the bill. The Bush tax cuts, which caused us to borrow well over a trillion dollars was passed the same way. Of course, bills passed this way have a sunset date -- 10 years out. But don't take my word -- the Google is there for all who will use it.

Now if you care to find me some reliable polling (I mean by 3+ sources) that show the bills passed in the lame duck session were unpopular with the American people, I'll stand by while you gather that data to share.

I honestly think most of your complaints about being shut out of the process and having bills "rammed down (your) throat" are baseless, and have no reliable data to back them.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 10, 2011 8:12 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian | January 10, 2011 7:54 AM


Instead of you trying to put word's in people's mouths, I will tell you directly


WHAT you are doing right now is not civil discussion.

YOU are provoking people right now - and you are trying to start a partisan fight.


I am saying to you directly that OBAMA'S FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM - and the ridiculous name-calling which has come from the democrats over the past 2 years - have CREATED THE NEGATIVE ATMOSPHERE in this nation.


Your few comments this morning are the same - creating a divisive negative atmosphere.


The nation is telling the democrats "get out of my face."


GET IT?


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 8:14 AM | Report abuse

"GO AHEAD, KEEP ON GETTING IN PEOPLE'S FACES"

... and you'll shoot me, right?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 10, 2011 8:16 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian | January 10, 2011 8:12 AM


You have no idea what you are talking about - and you are being deceptive.

The nation wants no more of the lies from the Obama people.


WHAT I am talking about is the overall negative atmosphere in this nation - CREATED by the Obama people.


No one cares about a stupid Baucus hearing.

When Scott Brown won, that should have been RESPECTED. There should NEVER have been reconciliation.


WHEN the Republicans won the election in November, THAT ELECTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESPECTED. There should NEVER have been this lame duck session.


I hope you have the minimum intelligence to understand this.

And I hope you understand that no amount of deceptions and lies from you will change REALITY.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 8:18 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian

RFR is Right Wing lunatic who trolls this blog. Some of the Conservatives here encourage him but everyone else ignores him.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 10, 2011 8:18 AM | Report abuse

hey jprestonian, we ignore RFR around here. No exceptions please. Thanks.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:19 AM | Report abuse

So, all the leftist, slander machines seem to have been cheated out of their juicey, anti-TEA PARTY, anti-Republican, anti-conservative, propaganda orgy. They are now gnashing their peg-like teeth in total despair.

What now, Krugman, et al.

Posted by: battleground51 | January 10, 2011 8:20 AM | Report abuse

Hey jprestonian .. we ignore RFR around here. No exceptions, please, thanks.

See previous thread for a browser add-in that takes the willpower factor out of thie.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:22 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian at 8:12 AM

I'm sure you are one of those people who have written into a blog that "no, you really don't believe the deficit should be lower, you are really using that issue to hide racism."


The False Charges of Racism have dragged down the atmosphere in the nation - and it is about time the democrats realize that they are RESPONSIBLE.

It is people LIKE YOU, with your attitude


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 8:22 AM | Report abuse

"No one cares about a stupid Baucus hearing."

Well, I can see that YOU clearly don't, since it doesn't fit your culture of victimhood, "GOP was shut out of the discussion" frame.

"When Scott Brown won, that should have been RESPECTED."

Because 59 Senators isn't still a majority, I suppose. *scratches head*

Well, I see now we're not going to get anywhere. I guess you'll have to shoot me.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 10, 2011 8:23 AM | Report abuse

Of course, maybe the Post has to write that b/c it provides a regular forum for a stable of Right WIng haters.

==

... and hosts some of the most crazed right-wing columnists of any major paper in the country. People who belong in prison or the gas chamber for their roles in the previous administration.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:26 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne

Your comment at 8:18 AM is an ad hominem attack, which, if the rules were enforced the way the Washington Post says they should be, would get you banned.


In response to your comment, the THREATS to this nation are the LEFT WING LUNATICS who have hijacked our government.


The left wing is SPENDING MONEY and creating a deficit of 1.3 TRILLION DOLLARS.

And you appear like you are clueless as to why people feel that the government is out-of-control


The Republicans WON the election this Fall.

The democrats then start to JAM THROUGH their liberal agenda - and they APPEAR TO WONDER why people feel their government is running out-of-control.


The ELECTIONS should control this nation, not the LEFT WING LUNATICS and the liberal agenda.


People feel as though the LEFT WING is doing PERMANENT DAMAGE TO THIS NATION.

PERMANENT DAMAGE TO THE ECONOMY.


I hope you understand this. I hope your arrogance and character flaws do you prevent you from recognizing this simple reality.


NO amount of name-calling, no amount of lies, no amount of DECEPTIONS FROM THE OBAMA PEOPLE is going to change reality.


you really are a bunch of fools.


There is a WOMAN LYING IN THE HOSPITAL today, and the democrats appear STILL to refuse to recognize that their actions and their rhetoric HAVE BEEN DRAGGING DOWN THIS NATION FOR TWO YEARS.


Take some personal responsibility.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 8:28 AM | Report abuse

That whirlwind has touched down most forcefully in Arizona, which Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik described after the shooting as the capital of “the anger, the hatred and the bigotry that goes on in this country.” Anti-immigrant sentiment in the state, firmly opposed by Ms. Giffords, has reached the point where *Latino studies programs that advocate ethnic solidarity have actually been made illegal.*

==

Everyone get that?

You know, Republicans love freedom right? Supportin' th' Constitution an all thet?

Waiting for the other shoe to drop ...

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:30 AM | Report abuse

@cao: "People who belong in prison or the gas chamber for their roles in the previous administration."

Hmm. Well, there aren't a lot of gas chambers available these days. What else might you suggest, Cao?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 10, 2011 8:30 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne at 7:30, that is one of the most despicably dishonest and disgusting packs of lies I've ever read. You really are beyond belief. Especially since your sense of propriety is apparently such that it became okay for you at some arbitrary point in time to start blaming conservatives, in the face of all the facts of the case contradicting your vile claims. Apparently you think you are a good citizen for waiting a decent interval to begin the blood libel and politicization.


If anyone wasn't here, by all means, go back to Saturday's thread and the Sunday open thread. You'll see Ethan and fiona5 and others quickly jump to blame conservative. A few honorable lefties like Liam, shrink, and lms tried to put the brakes on, but the nutters like Ethan and fiona would have none of it, and soon the rest like wbgonne joined the fray.

wbgonne, your credibility is less than zero. Whatever you say can reliably be assume to be a lie.


Posted by: quarterback1 | January 10, 2011 8:30 AM | Report abuse

Hey, Kevin, I'm old. What's the standard for war crimes these days? Lethal injection? Ol' Sparky? Deportation to Israel? Work with me here.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:32 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian, you are free to "ignore" whomever you want, but caothien9 is the only one here who has posted his desire of gassing political opponents.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 8:33 AM | Report abuse

Greg:

You said last night:

"And I hope the shooting will get folks who aren't themselves prone to sinking to such depths to be a bit more determined to call it out as unacceptable when we see it in others."

Here's your chance to lead the way. From this morning at 8:26, from cao:

"[The Post] hosts some of the most crazed right-wing columnists of any major paper in the country. People who belong in prison or the gas chamber for their roles in the previous administration."

I look forward to hearing your condemnation.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 10, 2011 8:38 AM | Report abuse

"caothien9 is the only one here who has posted his desire of gassing political opponents."

The only context in which I've seen that comment made is in connection to war crimes, so I'm assuming this refers to capital punishment, which in this country is only meted out after a trial and conviction.

When this commenter runs for public office and starts making snide comments about gassing the opponent, I'll be a little more concerned.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 10, 2011 8:39 AM | Report abuse

Sargent's call to cool (alleged) "quasi-violent and out-of-bounds" speech is a call to police all speech; and I can't think of anybody in government, politics, business, or the media that I'd trust with that power.

As Jonathan Rauch wrote brilliantly in Harper's in 1995, "The vocabulary of hate is potentially as rich as your dictionary, and all you do by banning language used by cretins is to let them decide what the rest of us may say." [...] "Trap the racists and anti-Semites, and you lay a trap for me too. Hunt for them with eradication in your mind, and you have brought dissent itself within your sights."

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 10, 2011 8:39 AM | Report abuse

Another point to be made re: the Right WIngs' paranoid preemptive attacks and fulminant political correctness. This is of a piece with the Right Wing's insistence upon freedom without responsibility. That, really, is the Right Wing's motto now. Fo what you feel like doing. Say anything you like. And you are never responsible for the consequences of your policies or words or actions. The Right Wing feels entitled to live in its Platinum Tower spewing Limbaugh's venom at everyone not politically correct and then decrying any connection between what they they say and do and the grotesque results of those action, policies and words. It isn't just the question how much the assassin was catalyzed by the Right Wing Hate, there is also the question of gun control. I expect there is already an organized Right WIng effort to sever gun policy from this massacre. If not, there will be very soon. This is political correctness run amok. We are not even allowed to question whether hateful political rhetoric precipitates hateful political action. That is bizarre.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 10, 2011 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Sargent's call to cool (alleged) "quasi-violent and out-of-bounds" speech is a call to police all speech; and I can't think of anybody in government, politics, business, or the media that I'd trust with that power.

As Jonathan Rauch wrote brilliantly in Harper's in 1995, "The vocabulary of hate is potentially as rich as your dictionary, and all you do by banning language used by cretins is to let them decide what the rest of us may say." [...] "Trap the racists and anti-Semites, and you lay a trap for me too. Hunt for them with eradication in your mind, and you have brought dissent itself within your sights."

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 10, 2011 8:41 AM | Report abuse

The Right Wing's grip on this country is so tight we are not even permitted to question whether there is a link between Conservative rhetoric and the assassin's actions. That is political correctness at its absolute worst. And what it says about the majority of Conservatives posting comments here is for others to decide for themselves. I know what I think.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:43 AM | Report abuse

All, Morning Roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/the_morning_plum_163.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | January 10, 2011 8:43 AM | Report abuse

@qb: "Nope, sorry buy you're flatly wrong. It is a survey symbol used to mark points on maps. You can look it up, and it's quite clear that's what it is."

And if it's a bullseye, so what? The real intent--let's win these elections--was pretty clear, using the kinds of metaphors that are used, by both sides, all the time.

While, of course, we want to avoid incitements to violence, I think we also want to avoid a point where every form of disagreeable speech can be reinterpreted through a filter of being an incitement to violence. I believe it was wbgonne who characterized political vitriol as being the same as taking an ad out in the paper for someone to kill somebody, and I thought at the time: yes, except in that case, they are explicitly saying, "I want you to kill this person."

I agree that giving out personal addresses is atrocious, and could constitute an incitement to violence. Saying, "we're locked and loaded, and ready to win in district 12!" is not an incitement to violence. If it is, every TV show that fetishizes forensics is an incitement to serial killers, every video game that's a first person shooter is an incitement to mass murder or warmongering, every Legend of Zelda is agitating me to wield a broadsword and shoot at targets with my grappling hook (okay, this last one is true, but it doesn't mitigate my overall point).

I feel like the surveyors mark, even if true, comes off as spin. And they aren't dumb--they know what it looks like. And it's also accepting the broader assertion that political organizations indicating seats they feel are vulnerable in typical ways (cross hairs, bullseyes, etc) constitute incitements to violence. Which sort of buys in to this implied argument: that society has to be completely defined by the worst, or most mentally aberrant, folks, in order that we avoid "incitement", and speech as to be limited thusly.

Also, I worry about our discernment regarding key distinctions. A targeting metaphor on a political map is simply not the same, in any way, shape, or form, as giving out political figures home addresses in a broadly public forum. It's not even the same as hinting that 2nd amendment solutions might be necessary if the government doesn't hold itself in check, which, although reflecting poorly on the person who uttered it (who, guess what, lost the race), is still not nearly the same thing as taking out an ad for a hitman in the Shopping News.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 10, 2011 8:44 AM | Report abuse

wbg:

"We are not even allowed to question..."

I don't think that word, "allowed", means what you think it means.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 10, 2011 8:45 AM | Report abuse

Glenn Reynolds nailed it this morning;
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071913818696964.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

Those who try to connect Sarah Palin and other political figures with whom they disagree to the shootings in Arizona use attacks on "rhetoric" and a "climate of hate" to obscure their own dishonesty in trying to imply responsibility where none exists. But the dishonesty remains.

To be clear, if you're using this event to criticize the "rhetoric" of Mrs. Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you're either: (a) asserting a connection between the "rhetoric" and the shooting, which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b) you're not, in which case you're just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. Which is it?

I understand the desperation that Democrats must feel after taking a historic beating in the midterm elections and seeing the popularity of ObamaCare plummet while voters flee the party in droves. But those who purport to care about the health of our political community demonstrate precious little actual concern for America's political well-being when they seize on any pretext, however flimsy, to call their political opponents accomplices to murder.

Where is the decency in that?

/exactly

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 10, 2011 8:46 AM | Report abuse

The Right Wing's grip on this country is so tight we are not even permitted to question whether there is a link between Conservative rhetoric and the assassin's actions. That is political correctness at its absolute worst. And what it says about the majority of Conservatives posting comments here is for others to decide for themselves. I know what I think.


==

Oh come on wbg, lighten up. They're just a bunch of fun-loving youngsters tying to show how brave and tough they are. Weren't you ever you ever young? You know, who's gonna be first on the rollercoaster, who'd not afraid to walk through the graveyard at night? Who's gonna touch the snake?

Boys will be boys. They'll ouitgrow it. Really.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:48 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian in reply to your comment at 8:23 AM


I have calmly stated the truth to you.


In reply, you have engaged in uncivil discussions.

Cao, the resident Communist who is not living in Vietnam, is continuing his constant harassment from Vietnam.

____________________________

Yes, I have stated some issues, and you gave a pretty irrelevant point - the Baucus hearing.

That hearing has nothing to do with the fact that the American People did NOT want the health care bill.

_____________________

The Obama people have a DISRESPECT AND ANGER at the American People.

The election of Scott Brown was DISRESPECTED BY THE RECONCILIATION procedure.


The November election was DISRESPECTED by the lame duck session.


If you can not understand this, you are a foolish person who really should never pretend to have a civil discussion with anyone.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 8:49 AM | Report abuse

@cao: "The Right Wing's grip on this country is so tight we are not even permitted to question whether there is a link between Conservative rhetoric and the assassin's actions."

In other news, black is white, left is right, and up is down.

That's almost all I've heard or read about this, since it happened. Even the Sheriff's insistence that heated political rhetoric led to this got a ton of coverage on Fox News. He was pilloried for it, but the question was heard, not obfuscated, over and over again.

Seriously? You seriously believe this? Or this more of your own RainForest style performance art?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 10, 2011 8:49 AM | Report abuse

"They immediately tried to minimize the significance of the event, even before they had any idea what had happened."

What conservatives did that, wbgonne? Cite proof.

"I got disgusted and left."

That's funny. You didn't express any disgust. You just said:

"5 dead, including fed judge. Congresswoman doing town hall. Called Gabby. Husband is astronaut. "hopeful" Gabby pulls through. Motive unknown.

Check in later.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:49 PM | Report abuse "

The next post was by Ethan directly blaming the killings on the Republican Party.

You had by then also already begin to "diagnose" the murder as political, the product of resistance to decisions they disagree with:

""The social compact is breaking down. People are less and less willing to accept decisions they disagree with as legitimate."

I think that's right. And I don't see how it ends well.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:05 PM | Report abuse"

It's very clear what you were already implying.

By 7:47 the next morning you were back, explicitly blaming conservatives despite the fact that it was rather clear by then that Loughner was psychotic and there was no evidence he was a conservative.


"When I returned the next morning I reviewed the entire thread. What I saw was a frightening display of Right Wing psychopathy. Nothing but preemptive attacks and false claims of victimhood. Not a shred of compassion or decency, nothing but political machinations rejecting all blame and responsibility for Conservatives and Conservative policies. A hideous, disgusting display."

Have you no shred of decency or integrity? Preemptive attacks??? A hideous display for conservatives to respond to baseless, absurd, vile attacks blaming them for the murders? There IS NO BLAME, YOU MORON. Jared Loughner is a psychotic and even the buffoonish Sheriff Dupnik admitted yesterday that there are NO FACTS suggesting he was motivated by political rhetoric.

More responsible liberals still tried to put the reins on your and Ethan's ravings, but you went into full political vendetta mode, facts be damned.

Not a word that you type here has the slightest credibility. You have no honor, no integrity, no sense, no judgment. This performance by you seals those realities forever.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 10, 2011 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Kevin

Cao came first, he has been doing this for years at the Fix.

The only reason I write this way is an attempt to cut through Cao and the Obama paid trolls, who do nothing but mock and harass people.


I hope you are beginning to understand what I have been dealing with for a number of years now.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 10, 2011 8:51 AM | Report abuse

cao:

"we are not even permitted..."

For not being "permitted", it sure has happened quite a bit. Again, I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 10, 2011 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Kevin,

"And if it's a bullseye, so what? The real intent--let's win these elections--was pretty clear, using the kinds of metaphors that are used, by both sides, all the time."

I agree with you. Clinton's campaign made famous the . . . wait . .. get ready . . . war room.

But I still think it is important to refute the meme that Palin "put Democrats in crosshairs." She didn't. It's just one small lie within a bigger lie.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 10, 2011 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Kevin, those are wbg's words.

Temper that zeal, tyke

Posted by: caothien9 | January 10, 2011 8:59 AM | Report abuse

"The only context in which I've seen that comment made is in connection to war crimes, so I'm assuming this refers to capital punishment, which in this country is only meted out after a trial and conviction."

You assume wrong. Way wrong.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 10, 2011 9:00 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian, it was not just limited to alleged war crimes. And, Sarah Palin isn't running for any public office (yet).

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 9:43 AM | Report abuse

I think it's even more crass and counterproductive to let those who called for violence and death like Sarah Palin did (and not just with her cross hairs graphic - people literally called for Obama's death during some of her speeches and she said nothing) off the hook.

Sarah Palin needs to be held accountable here or there is not much point in trying to change the narrative.

Another thing, what about tools like Chuck Tood who pooh poohed Giffords herself when she said that violent words like Palin's have consequences?

I'm sick and tired of the MSM's right-wing-enabling response.

Even the Tea Party assumed that the assassin was one of theirs! And Sarah Palin removed her website! What does that tell you? They know they are guilty. Why should we pretend they're not??

Posted by: solsticebelle | January 10, 2011 10:58 AM | Report abuse

solsticebelle, the Secret Service investigated that and found nothing there. I doubt that Palin even heard the "Kill him!"

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/10/secret-service-looking-into-potential-threat-on-obama.php

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"I think it's even more crass and counterproductive to let those who called for violence and death like Sarah Palin did (and not just with her cross hairs graphic - people literally called for Obama's death during some of her speeches and she said nothing) off the hook."

I've seen a lot of lies by PL commenters, but you take the cake.

You realize you committed open-and-shut actionable defamation against Palin here, even considering that she is a public figure?


Posted by: quarterback1 | January 10, 2011 1:35 PM | Report abuse

That's just standard operating procedure for solsticebelle.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 10, 2011 3:06 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