Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:13 AM ET, 01/ 8/2011

Open Thread

By Greg Sargent

I have to get a tooth pulled today. Should be a nice break from following politics.

By Greg Sargent  | January 8, 2011; 9:13 AM ET
Categories:  Miscellaneous  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: Sunday Open Thread

Comments

Free-for-all. Partay!

We've had a team of photographers from a magazine in Hồ Chí Mình city ("Saigon") at the house the past two days. We've been Noticed. The house is getting written up and may be part of a feature article. They took like 280 pics of me holding my cockatoo.

Don't drop the last four letters, now.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 9:24 AM | Report abuse

congratulations

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Wuh oh, talk about must see TV, FoxNews Sunday is pitting Rand Paul, self certified eye doctor and faux libertarian against Chris Coons, the one time Marxist and dewitchifier of Delaware.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Bernie (to cao on the previous thread):

"yes, it is the blog commentary as seen by new-comers which represents the problem"

and:

"RFR and Brigade have disruption of discussion as their intent and they are a purposefully destructive influence."

I just want to be clear...it is your judgment that RFR and Brigade are "destructive influences" here, but cao is not? Seriously?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 9:34 AM | Report abuse

At the Weekly Standard this morning, Kristol and Levin try to convince Tea Party types that they have to capitulate on fundamentals and stop pushing for government shutdown re debt ceiling.

It's a fairly fascinating exercise in propaganda and I recommend it for that. As Yglesias argued, Obama actually holds all the cards here and he has not reason to negotiate with Republicans. Kristol/Levin implicitly acknowledge this but toss in every cliche and right wing falsehood at their disposal (eg, that they actually care about debt) to try to convince TP types that they will be happy without their testicles and that the Republicans can get something out of this if they yell really loud and, perhaps, cry.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/debt-be-not-proud_526872.html

Posted by: bernielatham | January 8, 2011 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Wow Scott afraid someone might have missed it the first time?

Did you miss your ration of special attention this morning or something?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Unfortunately, the liberal rhetoric about the 3/5 Compromise has caused some misunderstandings.

Par for the course, right?

Originally, the 3/5 Compromise was all about taxation. It really was not an affront to blacks.

There was no Federal income tax. The States paid the Federal government based on population.

So the question became - free population or total population? Hence, the North wanted the South to PAY more, so all South would have paid more if everyone was counted whole.

The REPRESENTATION then came into the discussion. Congressional Representation and Electoral Votes became linked to the 3/5 formula as well.

On Representation, the South actually wanted to count ALL the people - however the North would see the advantage in counting NONE of the slaves at all.

______________________


The Election of Lincoln

Ironically, if the South had more Electorial Votes, things would have turned out differently.


They say that the split in the democratic party did not actually cause the election of Lincoln.

However, if the South had counted everyone whole - the resulting increase in Electoral Votes just may have affected the Election of Lincoln - the CALCULATIONS within the democratic party would have been radically different.


Breckenridge got the second-most Electoral Votes, even though Douglas had the second-most popular votes - we all understand that now.

However, if the election was thrown to the House of Representatives, Douglas would have been excluded because the top 3 go to the House.

Remember, the House of Representatives as elected in 1858 would have taken the vote - with one vote PER STATE.


It is all speculation.


________________


What I don't get it is this - the South had half the Senate and the Supreme Court - why was the election of Lincoln such a big deal? Why couldn't they just wait it out???


Anyway - getting rid of Obama in 2012 is extremely important to our political system to show people to wait to the next election.

If the liberals manipulate the system again in 2012 - with the $700 Million in bogus money to Obama - there just might be some serious discontent in this nation.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Looks like I'll be flying back to New Orleans during the Saints game today. Hopefully I come back home to a celebration.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 8, 2011 9:40 AM | Report abuse

I bet Kristol got in a lot about "job killing."

Did anyone mention how great it is to have tax *incentives* to outsource jobs?

Wow. I mean, wow. Talk about a dead ender electorate.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 9:42 AM | Report abuse

"I just want to be clear...it is your judgment that RFR and Brigade are "destructive influences" here, but cao is not? Seriously?"

All intent aside, you think that cao floods this board even a fraction as much as RFR did in his heyday? Perhaps not anymore, but that's only because anyone who is annoyed by him has blocked him.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 8, 2011 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Scott

The only reason I post like this is BECAUSE of Cao - and the Obama paid trolls


They complain of "disruption"


ONLY the 100% carpet posting of their liberal agenda is disrupted.

Presenting a different point of view is characterized by them as a disruption.


They do NOT own the political debate in this nation.

However, they talk like a different point of view is somehow trespassing on them.

It is a JOKE.


__________________________


And yes, their lack of balance in citing their own liberals on these blogs voids all the legitimacy of what they say.


They complain about excessive postings - and yet they don't complain about the even-more-excessive posting of some liberals.


They complain about other things - yet they are SILENT when others on the left do the exact same thing.


Greg Sargent is GUILTY of this as well -
Including putting personal attacks in some of his writings.


These people are NOT to be taken seriously at all.


I have cut through all their garbage - and Cao is one of them.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 9:47 AM | Report abuse

cao:

"Wow Scott afraid someone might have missed it the first time?"

Sort of. I wasn't sure whether or not Bernie had moved on to the next thread and I wanted him to see it. If he's not gone back to blocking me from his sensitive eyes again.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 9:50 AM | Report abuse

wb, I read those ten pages you mentioned and took notes to guide deeper study, thanks again, this subject is more interesting than I thought...no matter how repugnant and etc. all these people said they thought slavery was, they also didn't seem to really mind it all that much, but of course, their letters show they had a lot on their minds - this was all about transacting power, not morality. Even reading what they wrote with their own hands, it is hard to get into their heads, semiotics being what they are.

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

Ddawd

IN Cao's heyday, he was horrible

You make horrible comments.

The whole Obama crew is intolerable. They refuse to recognize reality, at best.


At worst, they push deceptions and lies like DRUG DEALERS.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"It's a fairly fascinating exercise in propaganda..."

Is there anything that Kristol could conceivably write that you would not characterize as such? Had he been encouraging the TP to continue to push for a government shutdown, wouldn't you also have claimed that too was propaganda? It doesn't really matter what Kristol says or how he says it...it is the mere fact that he is saying it that compels you to consider it propaganda, isn't that so?

"...but toss in every cliche and right wing falsehood at their disposal (eg, that they actually care about debt)"

The right wing doesn't actually care at all about debt? Talk about cliche, Bernie. Does this make you a propagandist too?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 9:59 AM | Report abuse

The liberals are dragging down the political debate in this nation.

In addition, the liberals are dragging down the Economy.


If they realize the damage they are doing, it would be extremely helpful to the nation.


AND hundreds of people read this comments section - just because a few of you are closed minded - I cant help you.


It is far more beneficial to a person to read comments with which one does not agree - rather than just read comments from people with whom one agrees.


.
.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 10:02 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne said on the last thread:

"Not quite. That is the Conservative spin on the "controversy."

The search for Original Intent is largely ephemeral. Whose intent and whose understanding? The person who drafted the original language? The Committee that revised it? Those who voted for the Draft Constitution? Or, most of all, what the people in the states thought when the states ratified it?

The salient question when one is considering Original Intent is how the Framers' would apply the Const provisions in the face of present circumstances. That, of course, is unknowable so the Drafters built flexibility into the Const so that future generations could adapt it to meet their needs. That is the definition of a constitution as opposed to a legal code."

You can see here the nihilism of the "liberal" constitutional approach. They treat any effort to determine the meaning of text as a futile psychological or even paranormal exercise, and declare textual meaning "unknowable." It is a caricature of "originalism" derived from radical deconstructionism. This frees the "interpreter" from the authority of the text, which is now functionally treated as without fixed (or any) meaning.

The question of interpretation isn't primarily a psychological exercise about Mr. X's subjective intent. Language as meaning based on usage. Evidence of intentions of the various drafters and ratifiers can certainly be relevant to determining meaning, but principally it is a matter of reading the words that were written and ratified and determining what they meant in usage of the time. Our language has changed little enough that in most cases the meaning of constitutional language really hasn't changed.

There is a subtle by significant sleight of hand in wb's statement that the framers "built flexibility into the Const so that future generations could adapt it to meet their needs." The constitution was not written so that we could "adapt it" in the sense wb suggests -- molding it and changing it by "interpretation." They wrote it with generally stated but specific and clear powers and limitations within which the government could properly act.

That is a huge difference -- the difference between constitutional government and what amounts to textual and constitutional nihilism. In the hands of the nihilists, the text is in effect protean. They authorize themselves to make it "mean" whatever they want. So, lacking any remotely plausible basis for a "right" to abortion, they spy abstract and evolving "values" within "emenations from penumbras" of the document. But they try to have it both ways -- the text can't have any permanent meaning, but they still invoke it to justify the imposition of their policy decisions.

This isn't constitutionalism but the very definition of what Hamilton called judicial exercise of will rather than judgment. It just didn't have the 20th century overlay of deconstruction and nihilism at the time.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Hey, Scott.

Name one (1) thing Kristol has ever been right about.

Opinions, I mean. The date on his articles doesn't count.

Look, the guy even had a gig on the NYT, and they had to boot him because he got his facts wrong in every last paragraph. Kristol espouses the Ian Angell worldview and thinks there's something fundamentally amiss in the world if the corporations aren't in complete control and some working man somewhere isn't nursing an ulcer and terrified about his future.

Oh, that's right, you feel the same way.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Is there any actual evidence to support the proposition that the right cares about the debt? I realize they have been screeching about it since January 2009 but have they actually proposed any legislation that might actually, you know, reduce the debt?

Posted by: pragmaticagain | January 8, 2011 10:12 AM | Report abuse

What I've learned in my first 48hours of Constitutional scholarship, focused on original material from the period of the 3/5 compromise: kicking the can down the road was a structural agreement on political process that was built into the Constitution.

I believe I could write a book about this, Kicking the Can Down the Road, the American Solution by Shrink2. The way the country had to be formed, between the French, the Indians, the slavepower, the Brits, the weather, wild price structure changes...that fact that it/we survived had a lot to do with the ability to kick the can down the road, to do only what had to be done right now. But of course, that is a really bad way to solve problems on an ongoing basis (viz. Civil War). I think this has implications for the ACA, the deficit, our various overhangs in other areas and programs.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 10:13 AM | Report abuse

"I have to get a tooth pulled"

Greg:

That's probably what you say every time you go to this comment section.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 10:14 AM | Report abuse

So qb if we're to take the Constitution at its face as you say why do you and yours insist we ignore the first fourteen words of the Second Amendment? It could not possibly be more clear that the RKBA for for what we now would call a standing army.

I would need to see you calling for removing all protections on gun ownership outside the military before I would even begin to consider that you might have an honest bone somewhere.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Nuance is not nihilism. Neither is complexity. Unless your mind is stuffed with hobgoblins and you're searching for the Magic Text to tell you what to do. So much for Freedom.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 10:17 AM | Report abuse

RFR:

I've never joined in the chorus of people lamenting your presence here. Your posting style is what you want it to be, and I think that if someone doesn't like it, it is easy enough to skip past them. (I do so routinely for precisely that reason.) I find the constant commentary about your posts, despite the fact that so many claim to have Trollhunted you out of sight, to be exceedingly dreary and attention seeking themselves. I mean, if they really are and want to ignore you, why make you the subject of so much discussion? So, with that said, I hope you take the following in the spirit in which it is offered.

"The only reason I post like this is BECAUSE of Cao..."

Why you would want to post in a deliberately annoying manner (annoying to everyone, friend and foe alike, not just cao) seems rather inexplicable to me. Also, the fact that you were both posting here and in this style before cao arrived makes your explanation rather questionable.

" - and the Obama paid trolls"

No such thing exists. You are as foolish as cao and wbgonne if you believe differently.

"Presenting a different point of view is characterized by them as a disruption."

This is quite often the case, I agree. So if disruption is indeed your goal, I'd recommend that you simply post a different point of view rather than posting in a way that you know to be annoying.

"However, they talk like a different point of view is somehow trespassing on them. It is a JOKE."

I agree that it is often the case with some people here.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 10:19 AM | Report abuse

"It could not possibly be more clear that the RKBA for for what we now would call a standing army."

Care to translate before I demolish your argument?

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I believe I could write a book about this, Kicking the Can Down the Road, the American Solution by Shrink2

==

I'll buy it but only if there's a Kindle version. Other than a few physics publishers, no more dead trees for this mass murder advocate.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:20 AM | Report abuse

"no matter how repugnant and etc. all these people said they thought slavery was, they also didn't seem to really mind it all that much"

Shrink:

What many people forget is that the Constitution didn't come sown from the Mount in James Madison's hands. Drafting and ratifying the Const was a process of negotiation aimed at securing enough votes for passage. It was the product of a political process, with compromises, fudges and intentional ambiguities. The Framers set a framework so that future generations of Americans could use it to deal with the new problems that would inevitably arise in the future as the nation grew and the world changed. The Framers never dreamed that 250 years later American would be scouring for their personal views as if that would solve today's problems. There is no Sacred Text with the Magic Answers. The Const gives us a roadmap for solving our problems but it does not provide the solutions to those problems. That is up to us. That is what self-governance means. The Cons would have the Const be a straight-jacket that renders us and future generations unable to manage ourselves.

Above all, however, remember that this is just a game for the Cons. The real goal -- their ONLY goal -- is to remove all possible competing power centers so that Concentrated Wealth and Corporations can rule as they will naturally do in a capitalist society. This self-professed Constitutional reverence is a sham. Con Cons. Nothing more.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 10:26 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

Geaux Saints!

(Until the Pats whomp them in the Super Bowl)

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 10:27 AM | Report abuse

SCott, there is no "discussion" of RFR. He gets mentioned once or twice a day and is no more the topic of discussion here than the timestamps at the bottom of each post. Nobody is gloating about blocking him, for attention or any other reason. He is perfectly ignored and of no concern to anyone.

Thanks again to Kevin.

You just wanted to get in another whine about being a poor persecuted conservative. Here, have a hanky and a good cry.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

O&O.

(And I mean it this time.)

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

"Nuance is not nihilism. Neither is complexity."

No argument there. Nuance and complexity aren't what you argued.

To claim that the "intent" of the framers about current circumstances is "unknowable," so we just "adapt" the Constitution as we see fit, is nihilism. Neither nuanced nor complex.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 10:31 AM | Report abuse

"The right wing doesn't actually care at all about debt? "

If they cared at all about it, they would have done something -- anything -- to reduce it during the years when they controlled all the levers of power. But instead, they exploded the debt. And they have demanded huge tax cuts for billionaires that will explode it further. To pretend otherwise is either to feign ignorance or to indulge in it.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 10:34 AM | Report abuse

wb, no question, they even said so in their back drafts, i.e., that they were going to leave this or that unsaid, or unresolved, with the idea that it would be dealt with later, almost like an apology to future generations, almost the way the ACA was constructed and marketed. It is a remarkable structure, the kicking the can down the road method of moving forward through such diverse, not to mention powerful and opposed interests.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 10:35 AM | Report abuse

If it is the position of the right that the words of the Constitution must be read literally, that powers not explicitly granted are not provided, which specific words authorize the Supreme Court (or any Court) to overturn any act of Congress?

In other words, wasn't Marbury v Madison an unconstitutional power grab by Chief Justice John Marshall?

Posted by: pragmaticagain | January 8, 2011 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"To claim that the "intent" of the framers about current circumstances is "unknowable," so we just "adapt" the Constitution as we see fit, is nihilism"

Oy.

Whose intent? The drafters, the Const conventioneers, or the ratifiers? What about the conflicting views of all those people even within each group? The words are designed for maximum flexibility so that a self-governing people could adapt to a changing world. That's what a constitution is.

A constitution is not a straight-jacket that prevents people from self-governing. It is the very opposite of that.

Bye.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"In other words, wasn't Marbury v Madison an unconstitutional power grab by Chief Justice John Marshall?'

And Chief Justice Roger Taney's horrid Dred Scott opinion was at least as bad.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 10:41 AM | Report abuse

You really need to start using a dictionary, qb. Nihiism? Huh? Do you have any idea at all what that word means?

And if so-called Constitutional originalists are willing to ignore the first fourteen words of the Second, the very grammar distorted to emphasize the distinction now ignored, why shuld anyone take you originalists the least bit seriously, any more than anyone should take the GOP seriously about the deficit?

*A well-regulated militia*, not some joker who hangs out at Wade's and fancies himself a superpatriot.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:44 AM | Report abuse

wbgonned:

"A constitution is not a straight-jacket that prevents people from self-governing. It is the very opposite of that."

So, then, if "the people" decide that self-governing requires the prevention of, say, the building of a mosque on a particular piece of land, despite the desires of the owner of that piece of land, the constitution allows that?

Or does the constitution act as a "straight-jacket" preventing this particular act of "self-governing"?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 10:47 AM | Report abuse

@qb-

What do you think of Justice Rehnquist's dissention in "First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti"?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 10:48 AM | Report abuse

So Scott sees a clear path for the majority to disenfranchise a fashionably unpopular minority.

Ri-i-i-i-i-ght

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:49 AM | Report abuse

The "people" Scott, as represented through the government, approved the construction of a community center in lower Manhattan. Is it your contention that a group of protesters should be allowed to override that duly elected and/or legally appointed governmental body?

Posted by: pragmaticagain | January 8, 2011 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Oh dear, we're going in circles talking about that fetish object again.

That can only mean one thing ...

.. time for a WHAT'S EVERYONE READING THESE DAYS thread!

Alastair Williams, British SF writer.

"The Edge of Physics" by Anil Ananthaswamy. Don't usually do popularizations but this is about dark matter and dark energy and that math is over my head right now. Physics Book of the Year.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Reynolds, not Williams

Bugs here tend to be supersized .. centipedes as big as your thumb, for example. I am typing around a grasshopper gone the other way, no bigger than an ant. He's reading about the 3/5 thingee.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:59 AM | Report abuse

'So, then, if "the people" decide that self-governing requires the prevention of, say, the building of a mosque on a particular piece of land, despite the desires of the owner of that piece of land, the constitution allows that?"

'the people' -- this is a funny tic rightwingers have to call themselves alone 'the people'--do they get this peculiar quirk from watching Fox News and other propaganda?

"People" in lower Manhattan don't have a problem with the mosque -- it's whiny demagogues from far away who want to stick their noses in what is a local matter.

This is a good example of those who say they revere the Constitution proving they don't give a sh*t about it -- it's more important to them to persecute religious minorities.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 10:59 AM | Report abuse

cao, last time I read Scientific American on a plane, explicating dark matter/energy was going to be the key to the unified field theory, so we can put gravity in its rightful place in our minds, as in, something we can understand, if not manipulate. Is this the way the people who know what these words mean still think?

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 11:04 AM | Report abuse

This is way off topic but I found a link to this from Digby via Chris Hayes and it's a pretty extraordinary piece.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Muslims turned up in droves for the Coptic Christmas mass Thursday night, offering their bodies, and lives, as “shields” to Egypt’s threatened Christian community.

In the days following the brutal attack on Saints Church in Alexandria, which left 21 dead on New Year’ eve, solidarity between Muslims and Copts has seen an unprecedented peak. Millions of Egyptians changed their Facebook profile pictures to the image of a cross within a crescent – the symbol of an “Egypt for All”. Around the city, banners went up calling for unity, and depicting mosques and churches, crosses and crescents, together as one.

The economic woes of a country that favours the rich have only exacerbated the frustration of a population of 80 million whose majority struggle each day to survive. Accounts of thefts, drugs, and violence have surged in recent years, and the chorus of voices of discontent has continued to grow.

The terror attack that struck the country on New Year’s eve is in many ways a final straw – a breaking point, not just for the Coptic community, but for Muslims as well, who too feel marginalized, persecuted, and overlooked, by a government that fails to address their needs. On this Coptic Christmas eve, the solidarity was not just one of religion, but of a desperate and collective plea for a better life and a government with accountability."

http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/3365.aspx

Posted by: lmsinca | January 8, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Here is a marvelous sentence from Amar's book which bears on the question of constitutional ambiguity, intent and interpretation. It is referencing Dred Scott [ for those who skipped AmCiv., a SCOTUS decision in which CJ Roger Tany decided the Constitution, because of the ambiguous language and history of the 3/5 clause, required Congress to allow slavery in all territories.

"Men like Taney badly misread the document three generations after its ratification, such men were in a position to matter because the document itself created such a vicious apportionment structure that helped put them in power."

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 11:17 AM | Report abuse

I'm not sure I buy dark matter / energy at all, shrink. I'm more inclined to think that something is wrong with Special Relativity. The more I read about DM/E, the most it sounds like string theory .. a big fat guess with a whole bunch of new and totally untestable science getting more and more built up without a shred of evidence.

The jury is totally out as far as I;m concerned.

This book is a hell of a lot of recent science history framing some intelligent patter about the problem.

Lee Smolin has some really interesting alternative ideas .. one is that the "missing mass" thing goes away if you note that there is a certain critical value of .. you ready? ... *acceleration* where SR seems to break down.

One thing is certain. There is some seriously important physics we don't know yet. I just don't think it's DE/M.

I mean, you read about the candidate particles and it's like reading Star Trek.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Wouldn't it be lovely if the US was as civilized as Egypt? Imagine Christians here trying to stop the persecution of Muslims, instead of fueling it?
"
On New Year’s Day, a devastating terrorist bombing at a Coptic church in Egypt killed 21 people and injured 79 others. Although the identity of the culprits was not known, it was assumed that they were Muslim extremists, intent on targeting those they saw as heretics. Religious tensions immediately rose in the country, and angry Copts stormed streets, battled with police, and even vandalized a nearby mosque. The riots and heightened tensions between the Muslim and Coptic communities was likely what the terrorists wanted — to divide the Egyptian community and create sectarian strife between different religious groups.

Yet by Coptic Christmas Eve, which took place Thursday night in Egypt, things had changed completely. As Egyptian Copts attended mass at churches across the country, “thousands” of Muslims, including “the two sons of President Hosni Mubarak,” joined them, acting as “human shields” to protect from terrorist attacks by extremists. The Muslims organized under the slogan “We either live together, or we die together,” inspired by Mohamed El-Sawy, an Egyptian artist:

Egypt’s majority Muslim population stuck to its word Thursday night. What had been a promise of solidarity to the weary Coptic community, was honoured, when thousands of Muslims showed up at Coptic Christmas eve mass services in churches around the country and at candle light vigils held outside. From the well-known to the unknown, Muslims had offered their bodies as “human shields” for last night’s mass, making a pledge to collectively fight the threat of Islamic militants and towards an Egypt free from sectarian strife."

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 11:20 AM | Report abuse

"Men like Taney badly misread the document three generations after its ratification, such men were in a position to matter because the document itself created such a vicious apportionment structure that helped put them in power."

Well, people will always conveniently misread it if it suits them, such as the idea that the Founders believed in unlimited personal weapons ownership.

"One thing is certain. There is some seriously important physics we don't know yet"

Anytime you have a theory and the only thing missing is the one piece that explains everything -- well, that kind of makes it a suspect theory.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Greg, once you get your tooth out, take a look at the prior thread. Here's the question again. Why is Colonel Kurtz aka caothien still here?

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 11:33 AM | Report abuse

So it looks like Colonel Kurtz doesn't want to try to translate his 2d Am "argument." No matter. We'll just take it for what it seems to say:

"So qb if we're to take the Constitution at its face as you say why do you and yours insist we ignore the first fourteen words of the Second Amendment? It could not possibly be more clear that the RKBA for for what we now would call a standing army.

I would need to see you calling for removing all protections on gun ownership outside the military before I would even begin to consider that you might have an honest bone somewhere."

First, you confuse militia with "standing army." The 2d Am most certainly doesn't refer to the latter. A "standing army" in the 18th century was a professional, full-time army typically under control of a King and was viewed with suspicion. The "militia," on the other hand, were local and state forces of armed (male) citizens and, indeed, were considered to be the entire male citizenry with potential to answer a call to arms. Any decently educated high schools student has learned about this distinction.

Second, it's quite clear grammatically that the "militia" clause states a necessary precondition to security and thus the purpose of protecting the right, and not a restriction on the right. The amendment states: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
As I noted the other day, the grammatical and logical structure here is: X is protected because X is necessary to Y which is necessary to Z. It clearly is not: X is protected only for members of Z. That is just another example of twisting the words to mean something they clearly don't say.

I'm amazed every time I see a lefty put this silly grammatical construction on the amendment. If it meant what liberals argue and Colonel Kurtz ham-handedly tries to repeat, it would say, instead, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of members of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." (Of course, this wouldn't really change anything, given that "the militia" was understood to mean the armed citizenry.) But, instead, it is the right of "the People" that is guaranteed.

Even extreme liberals started to admit the truth about the 2d Am many years ago. Look up Sandy Levinson's article for a start.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 11:39 AM | Report abuse

I am going to take a different tack on the Constitutional law. I think the characterizations of the competing views of construction as "polar opposites" is incorrect.

Like QB1 and like most lawyers who have to attend to constitutional language in their practice, I think the actual words count, and that their meaning is often clear. I would divide the Constitution into the "litigated" and the "settled". There are many provisions that are so clear that they simply will never be challenged; for example, the date of the Inauguration. There are many that must be applied to specific instances - for example, one poster here argues that the Second Amendment is supplanted by a federal standing army, while it would make as much sense to argue that it was motivated by distrust of a standing Federal army or to have argued that the language was lifted from BWI law meant to permit outnumbered whites to have weapons to suppress blacks [this was Hamilton's criticism of it].
i think the current SCt is the first to have viewed the language head on and I have no quarrel with that; but to say that there was no room for argument belies the reality that it in fact was argued to the Supremes by excellent lawyers, and the decisions were split. *BUT - to say that an absolute prohibition of guns in the home of a law abiding citizen is countenanced by any reading of the 2d must be a tortured reading*.

QB1, I never got back to you when you pointed out that "Citizens United" dealt with an absolute, if temporal, prohibition. Let me suggest to you that the Court went outside the briefs of the parties to select its own "question presented". Had it stayed within the briefs, employing the judicially minimalist mindset, it could have decided for CU simply by ruling that the 30[right?] day prohibition on political advertising was an impermissible time, place, and manner restriction because it unnecessarily broadly suppressed speech. They never had to stretch to the point that they ruled that corporate/union funding was in itself "speech" that could not be regulated during a political campaign; they could have continued to treat "access" as a time-place-manner restriction, and dealt with issues on a case-by-case basis.

I should note that because newspapers and media outlets generally are incorporated and have a right to freedom of the press it would be difficult to enforce limitations on OTHER corporate entities. Absent CU, I think I could have devised a constitutionally countenanced limiting scheme, but it would still permit the NYT and FOX to editorialize every day, and would permit any entity that bought a media corp just for a mouthpiece to use it as one.

The reasoning that a corporation is an assembly of persons should have failed, I think. That argument, and the decision to write an opinion outside the scope of the parties' briefs, are what I objected to in CU.

Finally ,wrt Con law:

The starting point should be to apply the actual text to the situation.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 8, 2011 11:39 AM | Report abuse

pragmatic:

“Is it your contention...”

No. I did not make a contention. I posed a hypothetical and asked wbgonne a question in the context of his assertion. I wouldn't mind hearing your answer, if you care to offer one.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Speaking of tortured reading mark I didn't say that the Second was a prohibition-enabling amendment, I said that it seems to be explicitly aimed at that America had at that time for defense: a citizen militia.

The distrust of standing armies you named is not quite gone, we no longer have citizen militiae, we have that once-distrusted standing army.

I'm not real interested in hair-splitting about the Constitution, I'm only interested in a better society, and I don't think that goal is served by automatic weapons in the hands of mental unstable wingnuts and jealous ex-boyfriends, nor drug cartels.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:46 AM | Report abuse

"not quite gone" meant to be "now quite gone"

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Fiona:

“'the people' -- this is a funny tic rightwingers have to call themselves alone 'the people'”

Actually I quite dislike the term, as it tends to suggest the existence of something that does not exist. I generally tend to use it only when addressing liberals who not only believe this thing does exist, but think that their views are always and inevitably aligned with that of this mythical “the people”.

“This is a good example of those who say they revere the Constitution proving they don't give a sh*t about it -- it's more important to them to persecute religious minorities.”

Just so I understand...is it your contention that, contra wbgonne, the constitution does indeed act as a straightjacket on the way in which “the people” self-govern, at least in the instance at hand? If so, then you and I agree.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 11:49 AM | Report abuse

"What do you think of Justice Rehnquist's dissention in "First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti"?"

I think it was naive at best in two respects -- its suggestion that corporations' resort to courts to protect their property as opposed to protection from political branches should be sufficient, and its conclusion that the decision could properly be affirmed on the ground that the corporation was not prohibited from "political expression" so long as it was on a matter that materially affected its property interests.

The former really makes no logical sense, since legislative and executive branches spend much of their time regulating corporations. The latter is unworkable and contrary to basic principles of 1st Am law at best.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 11:58 AM | Report abuse

"You really need to start using a dictionary, qb. Nihiism? Huh? Do you have any idea at all what that word means?"

Yes, I quite know what it means. Which is why I used it as I did. Once you learn to interpret basic grammatical structure and the difference between militia and standing army, you might look into it further.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 12:06 PM | Report abuse

mark,

I don't recall that particular CU comment to which you refer, but, I find this portion of yours problematic:

"Had it stayed within the briefs, employing the judicially minimalist mindset, it could have decided for CU simply by ruling that the 30[right?] day prohibition on political advertising was an impermissible time, place, and manner restriction because it unnecessarily broadly suppressed speech. They never had to stretch to the point that they ruled that corporate/union funding was in itself "speech" that could not be regulated during a political campaign; they could have continued to treat "access" as a time-place-manner restriction, and dealt with issues on a case-by-case basis."

I don't see how finding an impermissible time and place restriction would have been possible without accepting that protected speech was involved. But perhaps I'm not understanding you.

In any event, the issue of the breadth of the decision and question answered thoroughly vented in the opinion. I think the majority was clearly right and the dissent wrong, plus I have always thought the court in certain areas has historically done a disservice by avoiding big questions. That's why we went over 200 years without any definitive ruling about the 2d Am.


Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 12:16 PM | Report abuse

"wrt Con law: The starting point should be to apply the actual text to the situation."

Of course. The question is the end point: How do we apply Const provisions to vastly different circumstances 250 years later that the Framers could not have imagined? The Const sets forth a framework and some provisions are quite explicit. But the overarching goal of the Framers was to establish a national government: to enable the American people as a national community to govern themselves as they see fit. One shouldn't miss the forest for the trees. Most of the so-called Const issues arising today are not constitutional matters at all; they are policy questions to be decided by the American people acting through the political branches of government.

The Constitution is not a suicide pact. Neither is it a straightjacket that renders the American people unable to self-govern.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, qb-

He quotes CJ Marshall, as you know,:
"A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of creation confers upon it, either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence. These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the object for which it was created." Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518, 636 (1819).

Am I correct in thinking that the current understanding of the rights of corporations would include political speech as being "incidental to its very existence"?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 12:28 PM | Report abuse

You seem, like Brigade, to have an obsession with cao, QB -- what's that all about? Why don't you just ignore him or block him, instead of hanging on his every word?

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 10:22 AM
------

I'll admit I have a weakness in that I like to call out trolls and make jest of idiots. I can do it without melting down and having my head explode. Unlike caothien9 who, frankly, cannot really control himself---thus the use of troll hunter. How many times a day does cao tell us his troll hunter count? It's so difficult and time consuming for rational people to just scroll past what they don't want to read. Oh, wait . . . I forgot . . . it's the casual passers-by that he and bernie are really worried about.

I enjoy making cao the butt of humor. It's wholly irrelevant whether or not he reads my responses to him. They aren't really intended for him. Some of his jibes are indeed humerous in a sick sort of way, but the real test of YOUR intellect is that you think he's extremely intelligent. Most of the stuff he arrogantly proclaims is pure nonsense and quickly demonstrated as such by other posters here. That doesn't mean he's wrong about everything; some of his posts are merely matters of opinion. Where he gets into trouble is so often making statements that are so easily refuted by fact and evidence. Communism vs. capitalism---911 truther gibberish---all southern Dems who opposed CRA promptly became Republicans---no one has ever survived a late term abortion attempt---the Civil War wasn't really about slavery---belief in multiple universes is sensible but belief in God is not---Repubs are all racists---the list goes on and on.

What's really telling is that bernie and cao seem to be kindred spirits. Bernie worries that passers-by may be offended by someone calling out a cao lie but okay with calls for mass murder of dissidents.
And he seems totally oblivious to the fact that were anyone to be banned from here, it would almost certainly be cao---too extreme for even Greg. Does Greg really want Plum Line to be the forum of contemporary Stalinists and Pol Pot wannabes?

Here's a test. Cao thinks your Drindl from the Fix. I doubt it. Drindl was like Bernie, continually cutting and pasting crap from other liberal sites instead of posting her own thoughts. What I mainly enjoyed there were her exchanges with Zouk/moonbat. Cao was always telling Drindl to ignore Zouk, and Drindl was always telling Cao to mind his own business---advice he never ever takes.

And disruption? Is Bernie really so full of himself that he thinks people come here just to read the dry, pedantic, mostly wrong-headed B.S. he grabs from leftwing hate sites to pollute Plum Line. Talk about driving away new arrivals; nothing will do it faster than his boring screeds.

But I don't block him or anyone else. I know how to scroll.

And you should really lighten up on your use of "cracker".

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 12:36 PM | Report abuse

It wouldn't be true unless pay to play, crony capitalism were the only we they could exist.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 12:37 PM | Report abuse

So qb if we're to take the Constitution at its face as you say why do you and yours insist we ignore the first fourteen words of the Second Amendment? It could not possibly be more clear that the RKBA for for what we now would call a standing army.

I would need to see you calling for removing all protections on gun ownership outside the military before I would even begin to consider that you might have an honest bone somewhere.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:15 AM
-----

See. Another bit of nonsense. Are there actually three people in the whole country who still take seriously this position? If so, go ahead and put it in the Democratic platform. All you need worry about are the rubes, right?

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 12:43 PM | Report abuse

"to enable the American people as a national community to govern themselves as they see fit. One shouldn't miss the forest for the trees. Most of the so-called Const issues arising today are not constitutional matters at all; they are policy questions to be decided by the American people acting through the political branches of government."

As they see fit? No. Perhaps within the boundaries established by the Constitution. Outside those boundaries, the government has no legitimacy.

There is also a curious failure of those on the left to make the same distinction the founders did between "the people" and the government. The left instead wants to identify them as the same. Whatever the government does is "the people" "helping themselves" or "governing themselves" "as they see fit. Of course, this explains why they view the Constitution as pretty much irrelevant.

The mystical invocation of "the people" "governing themselves" always ends up involving some people "governing" others, using them to their advantage, expropriating them, censoring them. The Constitution, however, explicitly and repeatdly distinguishes the people from the government and is supposed to protect us from it. It is supposed to protect me from wb, even when he claims to be a spokeman for "the people" "helping themsevles" through the government -- helping themselves to my income is what it always comes down to.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Chuck,

I'm not sure how to answer that. Yes, I suppose, many probably think speech rights incidental to existence. Others might think them more in the nature of positive endowments. Of course, others like wb think corporations have no rights and should have no rights (which is deeply silly, since, absent rights, they serve no purpose and would all be worthless).

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 12:50 PM | Report abuse

"The mystical invocation of "the people" "governing themselves""

You do realize that that "mystical invocation" is the fundamental principle of our nation, don't you? And by saying (i.e., repeating ad nauseum) that government equals coercion you are just making an argument against majority rule and democratic governance. But this is all sophistry anyway. You have no problem with majority rule or the Constitution when the majority does what you want.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 12:52 PM | Report abuse

From each corporation according to their ability, to each rich person according to their greed.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 12:55 PM | Report abuse

qb-

Reason I ask is, elected officials regulate corporations and one could think that they ought to have a voice in political matters because of it.

I happen to agree, though, with those who think that there are suffient grounds to regulate that voice.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"others like wb think corporations have no rights and should have no rights"

No I don't. And I never said that, either.

Carry on.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 1:01 PM | Report abuse

@cao and Ims... yes, it is the blog commentary as seen by new-comers which represents the problem (given the "troll-hunter" program we regulars have to put trolls on 'ignore'). Who'd want to bother?

Posted by: bernielatham | January 8, 2011 9:08 AM

---

Ah, yes. The majesterial "we". Cao is now one of the "regulars" in Bernie-World.

====================================

I'm very close to the end of my patience but I'd much rather we could figure some way to resolve this so that discussions aren't effectively destroyed.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 8, 2011 9:21 AM |

---

Maybe you should actually try initiating some discussion instead of simply posting left-wing boilerplate you've seen on some other site. I've noticed that the few regulars here who try to engage with you are usually dismissed straightaway as not worth the bother when they try to engage you or question one of your loonie leftist propaganda theories---not to mention the frequent errors of fact.

Note, I'm directly responding to two bernie posts. Is that trolling?

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 1:01 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne:

"Neither is it a straightjacket that renders the American people unable to self-govern."

You've said this before. I think you are exactly wrong. It is intended precisely to serve as a "straightjacket", defining and restricting the areas over which government action is legitimized, thus making the government "unable" to govern anything outside those areas. And so I posed the question to you, which you have yet to answer. I pose it again:

If "the people" decide that self-governing requires the prevention of, say, the building of a religious house of worship on a particular piece of land, the constitution allows them to so prevent it?

Or does the constitution act as a "straight-jacket" preventing this particular act of "self-governing"?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 1:06 PM | Report abuse

cao:
"Bugs here tend to be supersized .. centipedes as big as your thumb, for example."

But garden fresh and tasty.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Scott

Several straightjackets should prevent some liberals from posting on this blog.

That much is true.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 1:08 PM | Report abuse

We all could have predicted the day when Cao would start to annoy the natives in southeast Asia.


Who would have thought he would have welcomed a high-profile there.


A few political winds changing - and Cao will be hanging upside-down in a pit somewhere.


I really don't believe too many on this blog would object.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Another example of the framers intent today in AZ, a well regulated militia indeed.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 1:30 PM | Report abuse

shrink

Eyewitnesses say as many as 6 dead and 15 to 20 shots fired with others injured. They're saying she was shot point blank in the head. Jeebus. Let's hope they're exaggerating the severity which happens pretty often.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 8, 2011 1:50 PM | Report abuse

shrink2,
re slavery: what is especially troublesome today is that slavery is quite alive and well in Africa, as it was before the arrival of the Europeans, and yet we don't hear much about it from African-Americans, whom you'd think would be the most sensitive to the situation.

Hundreds of thousands were taken into slavery during the Second Sudanese Civil War. Many times it's Muslims enslaving those of other beliefs (including Christians) and claiming a religious right to claim female sex slaves, including children. Slavery in Sudan has actually been on the increase in the last 25 years.

---

Mauritania:
"A system exists now by which Arab Muslims -- the bidanes—own black slaves, the haratines. An estimated 90,000 black Mauritanians remain essentially enslaved to Arab/Berber owners. The ruling bidanes (the name means literally white-skinned people) are descendants of the Sanhaja Berbers and Beni Hassan Arab tribes who emigrated to northwest Africa and present-day Western Sahara and Mauritania during the Middle Ages. According to some estimates, up to 600,000 black Mauritanians, or 20% of the population, are still enslaved, many of them used as bonded labour.

"Slavery in Mauritania was criminalized in August 2007. Malouma Messoud, a former Muslim slave has explained her enslavement to a religious leader:

'We didn't learn this history in school; we simply grew up within this social hierarchy and lived it. Slaves believe that if they do not obey their masters, they will not go to paradise. They are raised in a social and religious system that everyday reinforces this idea.'"

---

I won't go into great detail. It's easy enough for anyone interested in the topic to research it.

The Bush Administration, under pressure from Christian groups and some members of Congress, attempted to at least address the problem through the State Department; you may recall that Bush43 was also an advocate for addressing the AIDS epidemic in Africa.

It's ironic that black people are still being enslaved in vast numbers today and yet here in the United States we seem mainly concerned with nursing our national psyche over what happened 200 years ago, while Louis Farrakhan and his loonie followers deny the situation in Africa even exists, Jeremiah Wright talks about America's chickens coming home to roost, and George W. Bush is regarded from the left as an inveterate racist. Remember the NAACP ad about the black man being dragged behind a pickup? Death penalities and life sentences are just not sufficient to wipe away Bush's guilt in the James Byrd matter. And Bush41's use of the Civil Rights statute to essentially subject the police officers involved in the Rodney King beating to double jeopardy? I guess it just went to prove what a racist he really was. LOL.

And we wonder why people in colonial America reasoned the way we did. Maybe we should all look in the mirror.


Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't seem like it, the shooter ran up to her first.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Giffords' Tuscon office was vandalized in March during the HRC vote.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 8, 2011 2:01 PM | Report abuse

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2011/01/arizona_congresswoman_shot_npr.html

"TUCSON, Arizona -- U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot, along with members of her staff and others at a public event in Tucson shortly after 10 a.m. local time.

The Associated Press reported that congressional officials have confirmed the news, first reported by an affiliate of National Public Radio.

Giffords, a Democrat, was talking to a couple when a gunman ran up and began firing. The man ran off but was tackled by witnesses and taken into custody, according to NPR. The local sheriff's department confirmed that a shooting took place and that the congresswoman was injured, but could not say whether she had been shot. The department said as many as 12 people may have been injured.

Other media outlets are now also reporting that Giffords was shot and say medical helicopters are landing at the Safeway grocery where the event was held.

Giffords was one of several Democratic candidates listed as "targets" -- with crosshairs icons -- on a website connected to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in the runup to the 2010 elections.

Giffords barely won re-election and is already being pinpointed by Republican advertising campaigns as someone vulnerable to a challenge in 2012."

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Another victory for the NRA!

Posted by: LeftCoast5 | January 8, 2011 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Giffords was interviewed on Fox news on Friday...I hope that had nothing to do with this, I really do.

Brigade, everyone knows slavery still exists and it isn't just in Africa. Same with genital mutilation, torture, even cannibalism, all going on today...slavery has been practiced since antiquity. Near to where I am there was an Indian slave market described by Lewis and Clark.

So what does the ubiquity of slavery have to do with the 11m or so slaves brought to the Americas between 1492 and 1870 and the relationship between their future generations and those of the slaveholders and emancipators? Answer? Nothing.

Maybe if Reconstruction had happened things would be a lot different, but it failed, disastrously. Frankly, I think the legacy of the Civil War and Reconstruction's failure creates at least as large a cultural burden on this country as slavery itself, but that is a whole 'nother topic.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 2:07 PM | Report abuse

There are 4 people confirmed dead. None named yet.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 8, 2011 2:10 PM | Report abuse

shrink:

"Ms. Giffords was interviewed on Fox news on Friday...I hope that had nothing to do with this"

What could it possibly have to do with it?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 2:12 PM | Report abuse

That is terrible news. For the sake of the country, I hope that it turns out, that this was not a politically motivated assassination attempt.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 2:14 PM | Report abuse

I have seen a report that Giffords was shot in the head. I saw one report that said she had died. Don't know accuracy.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Good god, what is happening to this country?

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 2:17 PM | Report abuse

shrink2,
"So what does the ubiquity of slavery have to do with the 11m or so slaves brought to the Americas between 1492 and 1870 and the relationship between their future generations and those of the slaveholders and emancipators? Answer? Nothing."
------

I guess you can make your own connections. My only point is that anyone who wears pants probably still puts them on one leg at a time. Slavery is alive and well today, but we are mostly concerned with what happened 200 years ago and how and why it happened. Perhaps the founders were also more concerned with what had happened 200 years earlier than they were about what was happening all around them. The past may be interesting and instructive, but those who choose to live there are probably going to have future generations asking how they missed what was going on right under their noses---and why.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Reuters and NPR confirm she has died and at least 6 others including a 12 year old girl. Apparently they apprehended the suspect. Isn't her husband an astronaut? Let's not assume anything until we know the facts or the motive.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 8, 2011 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Liam:
"Giffords was one of several Democratic candidates listed as "targets" -- with crosshairs icons -- on a website connected to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in the runup to the 2010 elections."
------

Well, I guess we know who will be blamed for this.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 2:21 PM | Report abuse

I will wait and see what law enforcement discovers, rather than jumping to conclusions.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Liam writes:

Giffords was one of several Democratic candidates listed as "targets" -- with crosshairs icons -- on a website connected to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in the runup to the 2010 elections.

_______________________________

THAT IS A DECEPTIVE LIE


No one sought a "target" in that meaning


EVERYONE KNOWS democrats and Republicans EQUALLY use the word "targeting" to specify that a particular area will be focused on for election purposes ONLY.


Seriously man - don't try to politicize this.


EVERYONE knows the liberals are FAR MORE VIOLENT than the Conservatives.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Arizona Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords


Did she vote for the repeal of Dont Ask???


WAS SHE PUSHING THE LIBERAL AGENDA AFTER THE NATION CLEARLY REJECTED THE LIBERALS IN THE ELECTION???


WAS SHE A PART OF THE HIJACKING OF THE GOVERNMENT AND THE WILLFUL TWISTING OF THE MEANING OF THE ELECTIONS ???

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 2:36 PM | Report abuse

I think I understand and agree with your 2:18 Brigade, I don't do holier than thou, or I should say I try not to. I find it a contemptible habit, people accusing each other of hypocrisy in particular and I hope I wasn't coming across that way. That said, I also don't think everything is relative and values are all negotiable, etc. I think right and wrong are as real as the fact that everyones' poo stinks. Cultural relativism is a grotesque affectation of the affluent.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 8, 2011 2:38 PM | Report abuse

The Liberals have completely disregarded the Will of the American People over the past 2 years.


Seriously, the lame duck session was SHAMEFUL AND A DISGRACE.


THE LAME DUCK SESSION DISRESPECTED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE - AND DISRESPECTED THE ELECTIONS.


The liberals have been OUT OF CONTROL for far too long.


The liberals TWISTED the meaning of the 2008 election as well. Just because someone votes for "bipartisanship and post-racial policies" that DOES NOT mean that the THE NATION WANTS THE THE LIBERAL AGENDA.


AND yet, the liberals - for 2 years - have INSISTED that the meaning of the mandate was something CLEARLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE NATION INTENDED.


The lame duck session WAS INFLAMMATORY.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, Nancy Pelosi and Joe Lieberman - pushing through the liberal agenda in the lame duck session has inflamed passions in the country.


The lame duck session did NOTHING for the economy, or jobs.


However, the liberal agenda AFTER CLEARLY BEING REJECTED IN THE ELECTION, was on high priority for the democrats.

The democrats PUSHED THIS GUY OVER THE EDGE.


THE DEMOCRATS HAVE CREATED THIS SITUATION WITH THEIR CONSTANT LIES AND DECEPTIONS.


INCLUDING GREG SARGENT - WITH HIS CONSTANT BEATING OF THE DRUM FOR THE LIBERAL AGENDA.


AND FOR THE CONSTANT STREAM OF DECEPTIONS AND LIES COMING FROM THE LEFT.


The nation is SICK of the liberals.


How many times do the liberals have to be told???


Instead, all year - since the election of SCOTT BROWN - the democrats have refused to LISTEN TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE - and the democrats have refused to back off.


The atmosphere in this nation right now is the FAULT OF THE LIBERALS.


How about some more FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM - think that will calm things down????


The liberals are a complete bunch of IDIOTS.


NOW THE LIBERALS HAVE PUSHED SOMEONE OVER THE EDGE.


NOW THERE IS NOT ONLY DEBT ON YOUR HANDS.


THERE IS BLOOD ON YOUR HANDS.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Liberals:

Same childish tactics were probably going on there too

The liberals saying all year, like children "we arent going to listen to you"

"WE aren't going to listen to you"

"We aren't going to listen to you"

WELL, you PUSHED THIS GUY OVER THE EDGE.


YOU FOOLISH LIBERALS


THERE IS BLOOD ON YOUR HANDS.


AND LIAM HAS THE NERVE TO BRING UP SARAH PALIN


ANOTHER IDIOTIC STATEMENT FROM A LIBERAL.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Live stream from KOLD News: http://www.kold.com/

Reporting live says Rep. Giffords alive, in surgery. 4 Dead, 7 injured.

~~~~Prayers, please.~~~~

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Greg


It is YOUR inflammatory rhetoric which CAUSED this shooting


There is blood on your keyboard.

It would be wise for the nation if the liberals toned it down a bit - and tried to work with people.


The nation is SICK of the liberals IMPOSING their will on the country.


The liberals have BLOOD on their hands now for the lame duck session.


There is a CLEAR LINKAGE.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 2:52 PM | Report abuse

RAIN FOREST, SHUT THE HELL UP
___________________________________________

Again:

Live stream from KOLD News: http://www.kold.com/

Reporting live says Rep. Giffords alive, in surgery. 4 Dead, 7 injured.

~~~~Prayers, please.~~~~

Update: 5 fatalities

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 2:55 PM | Report abuse

To All Liberals

Including Greg Sargent and Liam


You lost the election - NOW knock it off.


This lame session was DISRESPECTFUL to the American People. The liberals have unnecssarily inflamed the passions in this nation.


Dont Ask should have NEVER been repealed - the Aircraft Carrier should never have been delayed.


The American People should NEVER have to listen to the liberals whining over the tax cuts for the rich - trying to divide the nation along CLASS LINES.


The liberals have been a DISGRACE

The conduct of the liberals since the election has been OFFENSIVE TO DEMOCRACY.


The democrats have acted like there WAS NEVER AN ELECTION THIS NOVEMBER.


Now - before you all go off and try to blame the Republicans like Liam did -


GO BLAME YOURSELVES

AND YOUR CHILDISH BEHAVIOR OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS.

YOUR BEHAVIOR HAS BEEN RIDICULOUS.

You arent even mature enough to be called Adults - after the

FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM

TWISTING THE MEANING OF THE 2008 ELECTION

THIS LAME DUCK SESSION


Does it EVER end with you people?


It really has been a joke


NOW there is blood on your hands.

Colbert King - still see "racism" in the eyes of people who are protesting health care???


WHAT A BUNCH OF IDIOTS WHO ALLOWED THAT TO BE PUBLISHED.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Liam brought up no such thing. Liam posted a link, and the text of what The Cleveland Plain Dealer wrote.

As far as I am concerned, the shooting is unlikely to have been done as an intentional political assassination. We shall see what law enforcement discovers, but usually political assassins, like those who shot JFK, Bobby, Dr. King, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, and George Wallace, go right after the lone target, and not all the people around them.

This reads more like an act of terrorism, than a political assassination, but we shall see what develops.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 3:03 PM | Report abuse

The only way the Democrat media is NOT going to treat this incident as a major propaganda coup is if the perpetrator turns out to be an ultra-liberal Democrat.

The chances of that being so is slim to none.

The anti-Republican, anti-Tea Party media blitz will soon follow.

Wait for it!

Posted by: battleground51 | January 8, 2011 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Just when I thought vile parasites like RFR couldn't get any more disgusting, they dig a little deeper into the muck.

Note the use of classic terrorist/abuser style rhetoric, "look at all the horrible thing you made me do" If only you hadn't made me hit you....

I hope that this particulat bit of poisoned effluent going By the rainforest moniker gets banned.

Posted by: Cicero57 | January 8, 2011 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I'm with Liam-

Can't we wait to see what the perp says?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 3:08 PM | Report abuse

He has been banned by Greg, but he keeps coming back.

He is just like the creeps who keep violating restraining orders. I do not understand why The Post does not contact his email provider, and request that they stop him from posting, where he has been banned.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Battleground, please, let's not turn this into a political event. No one knows anything yet and it's time right now to hope and pray she pulls through. I'm so glad the earlier reports were incorrect. Thoughts and prayers to all involved. There will be plenty of time later for law enforcement to determine the why of it.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 8, 2011 3:10 PM | Report abuse

John Boehner's statement:

“I am horrified by the senseless attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and members of her staff. An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve. Acts and threats of violence against public officials have no place in our society. Our prayers are with Congresswoman Giffords, her staff, all who were injured, and their families. This is a sad day for our country."

Posted by: lmsinca | January 8, 2011 3:13 PM | Report abuse

CLEARLY, the words and actions of the democrats over the past two months PROVOKED this gunman.


The democrats LOST the election - and they have been running around like whining children ever since.


This whole thing about saying any "compromise" is a "victory" for Obama solely - is ridiculous.


Not only does it STOP compromise, but that kind of attitude inflames the situation.


The democrats CAUSED this situation - the liberals drove this guy over the edge.


This lame duck session was the most DISRESPECTFUL thing I have ever seen a political party pull. It was shameful.


The conduct of the liberals writers - the blogges - has been equally shameful - in DISREGARDING the will of the People in the elections - and pressing forward anyway.


NOW the democrats have PROVOKED VIOLENCE IN THIS NATION.

Greg Sargent - YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE.


It is about time you tone down, and back off. That should have happened when Scott Brown was elected.


Instead, we have to get into a debate about the $500 Billion which Obama took from Medicare.

Be honest about it - don't ask for people to send YOU articles from the WASHINGTON POST - and then you insist on calling people liars when they have an article from the Washington Post to back them up.


Seriously, it has become impossible to have a mature, adult conversation with any liberal.


THE FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM have always been off the deep end. And the name-calling has been ridiculous.


What are you going to do? MORE FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM???


The nation is SICK OF THE TACTICS OF THE LIBERALS -


Get it?


Do you get it? I don't think you do.


I think your still saying arrogant things to yourselves NOW.


The liberals LOST THE ELECTION. The lame duck session was simply the most disrespectful way to go.


Greg Sargent included.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 3:16 PM | Report abuse

"I do not understand why The Post does not contact his email provider, and request that they stop him from posting, where he has been banned."

An "Ignore" option would suffice.

Posted by: SDJeff | January 8, 2011 3:17 PM | Report abuse

There was a federal judge also shot.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 8, 2011 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Liam already started making this political by bringing up Sarah Palin.


Clearly, the democrats PROVOKED this shooting.


It is about time to be honest and mature about it It is the FAULT OF THE DEMOCRATS


Battleground is correct - the liberal media is trying to find a reason right now to blame the Tea Party and everyone

Obama is probably on the phone to Homeland Security right now to try to blame the Republicans.


THE LAME DUCK SESSION PROVOKED THIS SHOOTING


IT IS CLEAR.


Obama can only blame himself for allowing the liberals to run wild -


for allowing the FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM to run wild


the liberals have been out of control for a long time

Everyone is FED UP WITH THE LIBERALS

Finally, someone went over the edge


they said "TAKE YOUR LAME DUCK SESSION AND SHOVE IT."


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 3:22 PM | Report abuse

"I do not understand why The Post does not contact his email provider, and request that they stop him from posting, where he has been banned."

An "Ignore" option would suffice.

Posted by: SDJeff | January 8, 2011 3:17 PM |
..........................

I disagree. That would be allowing the creep to continue to piss on Plumline after he has been banned.

Why should newcomers have to be exposed to the deranged behavior of this sicko.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Cicero

Are you going to call for the banning of the media when they try to blame the Tea Party???

Give us a break, please.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still writes
"This reads more like an act of terrorism, than a political assassination, but we shall see what develops."

One act can be both of the things you describe. As has been noted, we don't know the youth's motivations. But I also can't help but notice there have been incendiary devices going off in mailrooms lately, some intended for politicians.

Posted by: bsimon1 | January 8, 2011 3:32 PM | Report abuse

"You do realize that that "mystical invocation" is the fundamental principle of our nation, don't you?"

No, I've read many of your mystical invocations of the people, you are always saying something quite different from, and typically contrary to, our founding principles. Your conception of "the people" is itself contrary to our founding principles, because it is fundamentally collectivist in nature. And you fail to distinguish between "the people" and their government, as the Constitution itself does. I note that you don't even address that.

"And by saying (i.e., repeating ad nauseum) that government equals coercion you are just making an argument against majority rule and democratic governance."

You mistake me for Scott. I think that coercion (more specifically, legitimate coercion) is a characteristic of government but is not its sum and substance. But you fool yourself in imagining that "majority rule and democratic governance" do not involve coercion. That is why the Constitution was designed with only limited aspects of "majority rule and democratic governance." Preventing tyranny of the majority was one of the primary objectives. Surely you must be aware of that.

"But this is all sophistry anyway. You have no problem with majority rule or the Constitution when the majority does what you want."

Is there a coherent point here somewhere?

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Is there a coherent point here somewhere?

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 3:41 PM
============================

Funny. I think qb1 must have taken an improv course somewhere. Good luck, future stand-up right-wing comedian!
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 8, 2011 3:47 PM | Report abuse

QB: I will demolish your specious arguments at another time. Not now.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 3:53 PM | Report abuse

@shrink2"Another example of the framers intent today in AZ, a well regulated militia indeed."

When discussing the "framers' intent" with regard to the Second Amendment, it's worth noting that the Bill of Rights in the Constitution was originally only meant to restrict the Federal Government from passing laws restricting the rights laid out there, not states or localities. The framers would have had no problem with a state or a locality passing ordinances regulating the possession or ownership of guns. A lot of these issues today stem from unintended (or intended) consequences of the incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the states through the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment.

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

Posted by: jnc4p | January 8, 2011 3:55 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne:

"QB: I will demolish your specious arguments at another time."

Will you ever get around to answering my question?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 3:58 PM | Report abuse

@wbgonne "Good god, what is happening to this country?"

The social compact is breaking down. People are less and less willing to accept decisions they disagree with as legitimate.

Posted by: jnc4p | January 8, 2011 3:59 PM | Report abuse

This is pretty sad-no matter the political orientation:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/01/the_climate_in_az.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 4:00 PM | Report abuse

"Giffords tweeted shortly before the shooting, saying: "My 1st Congress on Your Corner starts now. Please stop by to let me know what is on your mind or tweet me later." Giffords is married to astronaut Mark E. Kelly, who has piloted space shuttles Endeavour and Discovery. The two met in China in 2003 while they were serving on a committee there, and were married in January 2007. Giffords was first elected to Congress amid a wave of Democratic victories in the 2006 election, and she won a narrow victory against a tea party favorite in the 2010 election.
She has been mentioned as a possible Democratic nominee in 2012 for the U.S. Senate seat held by Republican Jon Kyl, who has not said whether he'll run again, or for the governor's office in 2014."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110108/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Hospital spokesman (live):

Rep. Giffords is out of surgery, in critical condition, in intensive care.

~~~~Prayers, please, for all~~~~

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 4:04 PM | Report abuse

"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

wbgonne:

"QB: I will demolish your specious arguments at another time."

Will you ever get around to answering my question?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Same answer.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:13 PM | Report abuse

The democrats

1) First twisted the meaning of the 2008 election

2) then they pushed through health care after Scott Brown won -

3) the RECONCILIATION was inflamatory because the democrats LOST the election with Scott Brown


4) then the democrats LOST the November election


5) this lame duck session was inflammatory AGAIN - Never did the democrats care about the economy or jobs - instead it was all about PUSHING THROUGH THE LIBERAL AGENDA AGAINST THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE


the liberals PROVOKED THIS


They pushed this guy over the edge.

AND the democrats REFUSE to be RESPONSIBLE.


Nancy ran up a 5 TRILLION DOLLAR TAB AND NOT ONE DEMOCRAT CARES


You pay the bill - leave the Republicans out of it.


Let the democrats PAY THEIR OWN BILLS.


We will see how fast the democrats become fiscal conservatives if they are getting a BILL every month for Obama's debt.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 4:24 PM | Report abuse

I'm listening to that live feed. Thanks, tao. THis is a awful story. An 8 year-old girl was killed. Congresswoman alive, in ICU, doctor is "optimistic for her recovery."

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:26 PM | Report abuse

the liberals are going to look to blame the Tea Party

Liam already went after Sarah Palin.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama on TV shortly. Shooter ID'd. 22 y/o from Tucson just started firing.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:29 PM | Report abuse

"Police say the shooter was in custody, and was identified by people familiar with the investigation as Jared Loughner, 22. Pima County Sheriff's officials said he used a pistol to carry out the rampage. U.S. officials who provided his name to the AP spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release it publicly."

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Obviously, the democrats should inflame the situation more by CALLING MORE PEOPLE RACIST.


That would work.


For two years, the entire nation has had to endure the name-calling, the nastiness and the COMPLETE DISRESPECT from the liberals -


GET REAL PEOPLE.


The American People have told the democrats for a long time now - we are FED UP WITH THE LIBERALS


Time to knock it off.

The democrats LOST the election - it was not right to disrespect that election with the kind of lame duck session we have seen over the past two months.

Seriously folks .

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 4:30 PM | Report abuse

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0111/Alleged_shooter_left_social_media_hints.html?showall

"The police have named a suspect in the shooting of Gabriel Giffords, Jared Loughner. A person under that name has a YouTube account that includes suggestions of anti-government political views.

""You don't have to accept hte federalist laws," the video above says; it also insists on the gold and silver standard, talks of revolution, and suggests that the government is imposing "mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar."

His linked MySpace page, no longer available, included statements about the gold standard and about SWAT teams paying for their equipment with illegal currency.

Among his long list of favorite books in his YouTube profile is Mein Kampf.

Loughner also "favorited" just one video on YouTube, which shows the burning of an American flag and is accompanied by an anti-government screed. A sample from that screed:

If there's no flag in the constitution then the flag in the film is unknown.
There's no flag in the constitution.
Therefore, the flag in the film is unknown.
Burn every new and old flag that you see.
Burn your flag!
I bet you can imagine this in your mind with a faster speed.
Watch this protest in reverse!
Ask the local police; "What's your illegal activity on duty?".
If you protest the government then there's a new government from protesting.
There's not a new government from protesting.
Thus, you aren't protesting the government.

Images of Loughner's MySpace page are circulating on Twitter, having been captured before the page went offline. His pictures include an image of a handgun:"


Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Chief Federal Judge in AZ also thought killed. Faced death threats last February. Under Fed protection.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Rain thinks her voting record justifies this. What a disgusting individual.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | January 8, 2011 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Congresswoman shot doing a regularly-scheduled public meet-up with her constituents at a Safeway drug store. Fed Judge also confirmed dead.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Obama on TV.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 8, 2011 4:47 PM | Report abuse

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

Arizona is the worst state in the union, bar none.

Brewer had just signed an open gun permit law in april 2010 which went into effect in July. More abt that at Kos.

The Right wing should be ashamed at how they are destroying this country from the inside out. It was no accident that the congressmember who was shot was a DEMOCRAT. Fk the Right Wing Republican Teahadists.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 8, 2011 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Arizona is the worst state in the union, bar none.

Brewer had just signed an open gun permit law in april 2010 which went into effect in July. More abt that at Kos.

The Right wing should be ashamed at how they are destroying this country from the inside out. It was no accident that the congressmember who was shot was a DEMOCRAT. Fk the Right Wing Republican Teahadists.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 8, 2011 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Liam

the suspect also has the Communist Manifesto on his web page - indicating he might be a liberal.


_____________________


To all liberals:

No links to the Tea Party yet, sorry to disappoint you.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Ethan

Clearly the democrats are to blame -


The democrats have been disrespecting ELECTIONS ALL YEAR


First with Scott Brown, the democrats lost their votes, but pressed ahead with health care anyway.


Then this November - the democrats lost, but pressed ahead with their liberal agenda in the lame duck session.


THE DEMOCRATS ARE DRIVING PEOPLE OVER THE EDGE.

CASE CLOSED.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:09 PM | Report abuse

MikefromArlington

Don't put words in my mouth


YOU have supported provoking these people


There is BLOOD ON YOUR KEYBOARD

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, the democrats have taken inflammatory positions all year long.


If Obama was a real man, he would admit that his own ACTIONS may have PROVOKED this person.


Obama should ADMIT that he promised to be bipartisan, and he has been anything but that.

Clearly, the democrats in Washington have inflamed the poltical atmosphere in this nation.


The lame duck session - after losing the November election - is just one CLEAR EXAMPLE.


The liberals should take a long, hard look at themselves.


This country deserves better than the liberals who refuse to accept the results of elections.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:14 PM | Report abuse

ETHAN AND RAIN FOREST

For DECENCY'S sake:

SHUT THE HELL UP.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Ethan,

You are an embarassment to yourself and everything and everyone unfortunate enough to be associated with you. Wow, what an idiot you are.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 5:18 PM | Report abuse

RFR is a revolting fat maggot -- an employed lazy bum and leech.

ON Loughner's Facebook page -- his 'likes' are Sarah Palin -- she of the Giffords in the crosshairs -- and Tea Party Patriots.

what is this country coming to, wbgone? Why second amendment solutions, of course. With all the violent rhetoric on the right that has been building since last year, something was bound to happen.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Just now @ http://www.kold.com/
live feed:

Eyewitness at the scene this morning says the gunman tackled and held down by four
"older" men.

Maybe we're not as far gone as is feared.

~~~~Prayers, please, for all~~~~

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 5:18 PM | Report abuse

I agree with RainForestRising.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 5:19 PM | Report abuse

I advise that folks clear their troll hunter lists temporarily and read what RainForestRising has been writing.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 8, 2011 5:20 PM | Report abuse


The Obama Paid Trolls

The "paid troll" problem started with the Obama campaign - hiring people in shifts to push Obama's garbage like DRUG DEALERS.


Now that most of that garbage has been PROVEN to be just that - a bunch of deceptions and lies - the liberals simply will not stop.


The liberals have hijacked the government - and they are intent on completely destroying the economy until they are all voted out of office.


However - the truth is that the Obama campaign had the PAID TROLLS - and they paid people to HARASS PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET.


These PAID TROLLS WERE LOCATED IN A BUILDING AT THE CORNER OF MICHIGAN AVE AND WACKER IN CHICAGO, IL at


233 N. Michigan Ave., Corner of Wacker, Chicago, IL


THAT IS WHERE OBAMA HAD HIS PAID TROLLS


So, can we all stop this garbage?

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:26 PM | Report abuse

tao:

"Maybe we're not as far gone as is feared."

Of course we aren't. Horrible things have happened in the past. They will happen again in the future. Such events are no reflection on the basic goodness and decency of most Americans.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Fiona

I KNEW you would try to blame the Tea Party

the Gunman had the Communist Manifesto on his myspace page

THAT MEANS HE LOVES OBAMA.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:30 PM | Report abuse

"Speaking of tortured reading mark I didn't say that the Second was a prohibition-enabling amendment, I said that it seems to be explicitly aimed at that America had at that time for defense: a citizen militia. Posted by: caothien9 "

Unfortunately, you leave out two key words. The WELL REGULATED militia were privately recruited and equipped military units. Henry Lee raised his own light cavalry. He saw to their training, devised their uniforms, and appointed their officers. Lee's Legion served through out the war in the South. "Light Horse" Harry was Robert E Lee's father, and gave the eulogy at Washington's funeral. Described Washington as "First in War ..." There were many such "Well Regulated" Militia in the colonies, and THEY, not the ordinary volunteers were the backbone of Washington's Army. John Glover's Marblehead Regiment, the troops who transported the Continental Army across the Deleware, were also a Well Regulated Militia.

Such militia existed up until the Civil War, military clubs who went in for far more drill and military discipline than the ordinary militia. THEY constituted a standing Army, sort of, not under the control of the Government. The King had always distrusted such units, which also existed in England when the crown didn't make them illegal. The Military action that lead to the "Battles" at Lexington and Concord was directed at disarming such militia in Massachusetts.

The men who insisted on the 2nd Amendment never envisaged a disarmed citizenry, since fire arms were integral to ordinary living. They wrote the Second Amendment to protect those private military units.

If you want to argue the rights of anyone to carry guns as protected by the Second Amendment, it would be groups like the Michigan Militia, PROVIDED that they actually properly trained and drilled. The right protected by what the authors wrote would be more along the lines of the Michigan Militia to roganize, appoint officers, charter under Michigan Law, and expect to be able to train at Federal or State military camps under Regulars, and to therefore carry military ARMS. (High powered rifles, pikes, archery and crossbows, and side arms, swords and pistols.) They would not automatically be entitled to have artillery, (Howitzers, guns, automatic weapons, machine guns, or recoilless rifles) unless their charter called for them.

ALL other readings of the Second Amendment are in addition to that particular reading. So the NRA's claims of untrammeled right to own any kind of firearm they can purchase, and any kind of ammunition, are a later interpretation, NOT the original understanding of the men who wrote the amendment.

Posted by: ceflynline | January 8, 2011 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama and the democrats should be mature and take responsibility for inflaming the nation during the lame duck session.


The democrats LOST the election - and they were not mature enough to allow the AMERICAN PEOPLE to control the course of their own government.


This government has been HIJACKED.


The Will of the American People has been DISRESPECTED.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:32 PM | Report abuse

~~~~Prayers, please, for all~~~~

Yes, just this, nothing more.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 8, 2011 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Bernie - RFR is an extremely mentally ill individual. There is no reason to read his posts, it just breaks your heart and disgusts you at the same time to see how badly damaged and deeply sick a malfunctioning brain can be.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 5:33 PM | Report abuse

The Gunman said goodbye on his myspace page.


How touching.


I wonder if he updated his status to "on death row."

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:35 PM | Report abuse

"Bernie - RFR is an extremely mentally ill individual. There is no reason to read his posts, it just breaks your heart and disgusts you at the same time to see how badly damaged and deeply sick a malfunctioning brain can be."

I had similar thoughts when I read your previous comment.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 5:38 PM | Report abuse

@scott:

"Of course we aren't."

I know that in my core, man; I was just trying to gently buck up folks and point out there was also courage and honor at that cursed place today.
Thanks.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 5:39 PM | Report abuse

The federal judge killed was appointed by Bush and ruled last year on immigration case (Marshals were protecting him, obviously not today though).

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 5:41 PM | Report abuse

For DECENCY'S sake:

SHUT THE HELL UP.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 5:14 PM
=========================

Irony takes yet another sword thrust through the liver.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 8, 2011 5:42 PM | Report abuse

The Gunman asks


What's government if words don't have meaning???


____________________________

Here that Obama???


What is bipartisanship, if you refuse to meet with Republicans to negotiate after you are elected???


What is transparency, if you refuse to sign a release opening the file in Hawaii?


What is post-racial, if you insist on allowing your supports to LEVEL FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM???


What is post-partisanship, if you insist on reconciliation to impose a hyper-partisan agenda on the American People???

The DECEPTIONS AND LIES of the democrats DROVE THIS SHOOTER.

Take responsibility.


What is responsibility if you are seeking ways to blame the Tea Party???


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Fiona writes

"Bernie - RFR is an extremely mentally ill individual. There is no reason to read his posts,

_________________________________

1) Ad hominem attack, you should be banned


2) AND yet you read ALL the posts. Is it your guilty pleasure??? From your comments, you clearly read ALL of them.

do you secretly agree with them???

OR is it something that you just can not resist???

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Fiona writes:

"Bernie - RFR is an extremely mentally ill individual. There is no reason to read his posts,

____________________

1) Ad hominem attack you should be banned


2) AND YET you read all the posts. Are they your guilty pleasure???

From your comments, you read ALL of the posts - just as you tell others not too.


Secretly, do you actually agree with them???


OR is it that you just can not resist???


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 5:51 PM | Report abuse

I'll echo Tao. Also, Greg, I think 37th has gone way way way over the line for decent discussion in a political blog.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | January 8, 2011 5:53 PM | Report abuse

No, ifthethunderdontgetya...

irony is when your mother used to call you a son-of-b!tch.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Watching KGUN right now.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 5:59 PM | Report abuse

The reports indicate that four old white men stopped the gunman.


Four OLD WHITE MEN stopped the attack


Exactly who the democrats HATE - and yet, when you need FOUR OLD WHITE MEN, they are there for you.

OLD WHITE MEN simply do not get the credit today that they deserve.


Where is the AFFIRMATIVE ACTION program which is supposed to push those four old white men aside???

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:00 PM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade

It would be nice if you equally attacked Ethan and Liam for making the same comments, only blaming people on the right side of the aisle.

So, please you can stop your partisan attacks masked in fake morality.


If you apply you comments equally, only then will you have a shred of credibility.


However, perhaps you lost all your credibility when you voted for Obama.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:04 PM | Report abuse

This has been an enlightening thread.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 6:05 PM | Report abuse

The Gunman listed the Communist Manifesto and Siddhartha as his favorite books


CLEARLY an Obama supporter.


the democrats are DESPERATE TO TIE THIS GUY TO THE TEA PARTY.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:07 PM | Report abuse

KGUN

I thought that was a joke


Apparently the TV station down there is really called KGUN.


Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Agreed, Chuck. Today's events do put the lie to the claim that "Second Amendment Solutions" and putting targets on maps mean anything but the obvious.

37th - you seem to think I was speaking to you or could care less about what you think. You are a sad and strange little man and you have my pity.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | January 8, 2011 6:09 PM | Report abuse

@ Sharron Angle-

"Manders: If we needed it at any time in history, it might be right now.

Angle: Well it's to defend ourselves. And you know, I'm hoping that we're not getting to Second Amendment remedies. I hope the vote will be the cure for the Harry Reid problems."


Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 6:13 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline,

To the extent that you are arguing that the right to keep and bear arms is limited to members of a well regulated militia, the majority opinion in Heller provides all the refutation that could ever be needed. That interpretation isn't viable in grammatical let alone historical terms. I'd go read it if I were you.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 6:15 PM | Report abuse

The democrats have had a few hours to try to link the Tea Party to this


I guess the democrats will have to rely on their old fall-back: name-calling.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:17 PM | Report abuse

What's enlightening is the warp-speed with which people jam a crime of indeterminate motive through their own personal political prism.

For what purpose at present?

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Re: JakeD

No, I met him in San Diego. He has actually met several people from The Fix.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011

--------

I don't think he and cao ever met, although cao may have tried to lure him to some seedy motel.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 6:17 PM | Report abuse

"We at the TEA Party Express are shocked and saddened to hear about the terrible tragedy that took place in Tucson today. It is appalling that anyone would commit such unthinkable violence against Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, her staff, a sitting federal judge, and the many other victims and families impacted. These heinous crimes have no place in America, and they are especially grievious when committed against our elected officials. Spirited debate is desireable in our country, but it only should be the clash of ideas."

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Tao-

Agreed. Way too early for *this* particular incident, IMO.

As to Angle, that's a pretty inflammatory statement, again-regardless of political affiliation.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Scott to tao
"tao:
"Maybe we're not as far gone as is feared."

Scott:
Of course we aren't. Horrible things have happened in the past. They will happen again in the future. Such events are no reflection on the basic goodness and decency of most Americans."

Most people everywhere are good and decent. But the formulation you propose (there's always some bad stuff going on therefore witnessing bad stuff ought to yield no cause for alarm) allows for nothing but a steady state of affairs. And that's a very dangerous and undiscerning presumption.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 8, 2011 6:22 PM | Report abuse

"Most people everywhere are good and decent. But the formulation you propose (there's always some bad stuff going on therefore witnessing bad stuff ought to yield no cause for alarm) allows for nothing but a steady state of affairs. And that's a very dangerous and undiscerning presumption."

Why would you draw that conclusion? Do you deny that most Americans are good and decent? Or is the U.S. Thunderdome>

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 8, 2011 6:31 PM | Report abuse

No, ifthethunderdontgetya...

irony is when your mother used to call you a son-of-b!tch.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 5:57 PM
-------

LOL. That's a good one.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 6:31 PM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade

Your rude comments are inappropriate


To address your comments, I am tall and you can hold your pity.


AND you name still sounds gay.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Giffords read the First Amendment on the floor of the House.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 6:37 PM | Report abuse


FairlingtonBlade

It is hilarious that you have to type that you don't care what you think


Isn't it clear from my comments that I don't care what you think???


So what is the purpose of informing me of something that CLEARLY you know that I know.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Tea Party Express responded correctly, according to clawrence at
6:20 PM.

It would be useful if leaders of all political persuasions used this moment to remind us that as long as we are free to speak, publish, worship, assemble, and vote, violence is unacceptable in the political marketplace.

And I will pray for the victims tonight.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 8, 2011 6:41 PM | Report abuse

This is a blog on which liberals daily espouse hatred of others, demonize them, accuse them of all manner of evil, describe them as enemies of society and humanity, and on and on.

It's a blog where a new regular and buddy of bernie's openly and explicitly denies the humanity of others and calls for their mass imprisonment and murder.

It's a blog where all this is welcomed and encouraged by Greg.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 6:42 PM | Report abuse

'I had similar thoughts when I read your previous comment."

Funny, QB, I never call for the assination of anyone, but I guess just disagreeing with you is enough to cause you to attack me, but that is your own sickness talking.

Here is your tea party poster child, that you are defending, a cold-blooded murderer, a thug, a big fan of Mein Kampf, btw:

"No! I won't pay debt with a currency that's not backed by gold and silver!" Loughner writes.

"Or is the U.S. Thunderdome?'

We're gettin there.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 6:43 PM | Report abuse

clawrence12

It would have been ironic if she drew the Second Amendment.


Anyway, the democrats are still SEARCHING the gunman's background to find anything to link this guy to the Tea Party.


The word is they didn't even find Lipton Tea in his kitchen.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

'This is a blog on which liberals daily espouse hatred of others, demonize them, accuse them of all manner of evil, describe them as enemies of society and humanity, and on and on.'

isn't this what you do every day? and if you don't like it here, why don't you go away? there are a million blogs out there, why don't you take your whining elsewhere?

try stormfront, you might like it.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 6:47 PM | Report abuse

"This is a blog on which liberals daily espouse hatred of others, demonize them, accuse them of all manner of evil, describe them as enemies of society and humanity,"


____________________


CORRECT


You left out the part that Greg Sargent regularly throws out the Conservatives for speaking the truth.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:47 PM | Report abuse

For anyone who cares:
this poor congresswoman is a self-identified "blue-dog" Democrat with a history of reaching across the aisle. She was critical of the Obama administration for suing Arizona; she is a big supporter of gun rights; a deficit hawk; and she is Jewish. Shorter: can cao account for his whereabouts?

The guy who did the shooting is evidently a nutcase (big surprise!---can cao account for his whereabouts?), but I eagerly await the continued political posturing about Sarah Palin and "second amendment solutions."

But it's refreshing to be reminded, even under such tragic circumstances, that the Dem-caucus contains at least one female who is attractive, articulate, and also good-natured. Mrs. Giffords has even been touted as a possible candidate for the Senate seat now held by John Kyl. A good lady and the last one on whom you'd wish something like this. I'll add my prayers.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 6:47 PM | Report abuse


Fiona

This is what the Gunman wrote - and he was CLEARLY REFERRING TO OBAMA WHEN HE WROTE THESE WORDS:


The Gunman asks:


What's government if words don't have meaning???


____________________________

The gunman is CLEARLY REFERRING TO OBAMA'S 2008 CAMPAIGN WORDS .......

Hear that Obama???


What is bipartisanship, if you refuse to meet with Republicans to negotiate after you are elected???


What is transparency, if you refuse to sign a release opening the file in Hawaii?


What is post-racial, if you insist on allowing your supports to LEVEL FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM???


What is post-partisanship, if you insist on reconciliation to impose a hyper-partisan agenda on the American People???


The DECEPTIONS AND LIES of the democrats DROVE THIS SHOOTER.


Take responsibility.


What is responsibility if you are seeking ways to blame the Tea Party???

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:49 PM | Report abuse

I guess Brigade defends Angle? I would love to see him try...

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 6:49 PM | Report abuse

from September:

"Palin reloads, aims for Giffords

Earlier this year, Palin drew sharp criticism for featuring a map on her web page riddled with crosshairs targeting Democrats in vulnerable congressional districts.

Tucson's Gabrielle Giffords is among the 20 Democratic incumbents whom Palin intends to use for target practice.

Giffords and her Republican challenger Jesse Kelly are now neck and neck, according to the latest polls. Palin's endorsement of Kelly came as a surprise to many.

Kelly's photo is now prominently displayed on Palin's "Take Back the 20" website, just below the crosshair-covered map titled "We've diagnosed the problem. Help us prescribe the solution," a chilling innuendo.

FIREDOGLAKE ARTICLE
Jesse Kelly, meanwhile, doesn’t seem to be bothered in the least by the Sarah Palin controversy earlier this year, when she released a list of targeted races in crosshairs, urging followers to “reload” and “aim” for Democrats. Critics said she was inciting violence.

He seems to be embracing his fellow tea partier’s idea. Kelly’s campaign event website has a stern-looking photo of the former Marine in military garb holding his weapon. It includes the headline: “Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly.”

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Alert GAMEBREAK


If Seattle does win this game,

If Philly wins, then Seattle plays Atlanta next week.

If Green Bay wins, then Seattle plays Chicago.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

“Most people everywhere are good and decent.”

I agree.

“But the formulation you propose (there's always some bad stuff going on therefore witnessing bad stuff ought to yield no cause for alarm)…”

That was not what I proposed. What I proposed is that this event is no more an indication of how “far gone” we are than were similar events throughout our history.

I most definitely do not think that we have a perpetually steady state of affairs, and indeed I am hardly optimistic about the current trajectory of affairs. But the possible decline/demise of our country is not going to be signaled or even symbolized by the occasional crazy person visiting horrors on us. It’s happened before. It will happen again. We can, and should, grieve without trying to turn it into an almost certainly false portent of doom.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Bad day for a dental visit. Somebody should have been assigned to mind the store.

Posted by: temptxan | January 8, 2011 6:56 PM | Report abuse

I guess Brigade defends Angle? I would love to see him try...

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 6:49 PM
-------

Sir, have you no decency?

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 6:56 PM | Report abuse


'This is where our country is heading, and this is where certain politicians and pundits want this country to go. When politicians and pundits talk about revolution, and rebellion, and the 'tree of liberty' being refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS. Political idealogues convince themselves that what they are doing is right, and just, and patriotic. And when tragedy strikes, those who have actively created an environment where such tragedy is inevitable throw up their hands and say “Aw, what a shame.”

I remember writing about being outraged by Sarah Palin’s cross-hair map. I remember thinking what an absolutely stupid move it was. And now some crazy has put her plan into action, and she has the nerve to say “Wha?! What’d I do?”

That’s what p*sses me off the most— the utter hypocrisy of those who wanted this to happen—or at the very least, created an environment where this was bound to happen—now claiming to be sorry and to offer support to the friends and family of the dead."

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 6:58 PM | Report abuse

He seems to be embracing his fellow tea partier’s idea. Kelly’s campaign event website has a stern-looking photo of the former Marine in military garb holding his weapon. It includes the headline: “Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly.”

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 6:51 PM |
-----

As mark_in_austin pointed out, the teapartiers have condemned the act. Have you no decency? Probably not a good idea to try and make political hay on a tragedy like this.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

fiona,

You're not only sick but pretty stupid. This was your sick and stupid comment:

"ON Loughner's Facebook page -- his 'likes' are Sarah Palin -- she of the Giffords in the crosshairs -- and Tea Party Patriots."

what is this country coming to, wbgone? Why second amendment solutions, of course. With all the violent rhetoric on the right that has been building since last year, something was bound to happen."

-- hastily attributing murders by a guy who's obviously a mental case to "the right" and the Tea Party and Sarah Palin. You're obviously pretty shallow, too. Read a few too many talking points? How does his affinity for the Communist Manifesto fit in?

Accusing me of defending the murderer. Cute. Cite a comment or shut your mouth, idiot.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Brigade-

Glad to hear you don't condone her remark. Apologies if I intimated otherwise.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Have you no decency?


______________


If the gunman had ANY Lipton Tea in his kitchen, the Tea Party would be blamed on every blog in the nation.


Who are you trying to kid???


The democrats are desperate to blame the Tea Party - anything, they will do anything, to find one shred of anything they can rely on.

The COMMUNIST MANIFESTO AND SIDHARTHA really ties the guy to OBAMA - that is this their problem


How do the democrats get around that?


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Fiona

Your comment is a disgrace. You cant blame Sarah Palin


Did you see the gunman's video? Did you see that he has the Communist Manifesto???


Obama is clearly the reason.


_______________________


The gunman is CLEARLY REFERRING TO OBAMA


The Gunman asks:


What's government if words don't have meaning???


____________________________


The gunman is CLEARLY REFERRING TO OBAMA'S 2008 CAMPAIGN WORDS .......


Hear that Obama???


What is bipartisanship, if you refuse to meet with Republicans to negotiate after you are elected???


What is transparency, if you refuse to sign a release opening the file in Hawaii?


What is post-racial, if you insist on allowing your supports to LEVEL FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM???


What is post-partisanship, if you insist on reconciliation to impose a hyper-partisan agenda on the American People???


The DECEPTIONS AND LIES of the democrats DROVE THIS SHOOTER.


Take responsibility.


What is responsibility if you are seeking ways to blame the Tea Party???


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 7:09 PM | Report abuse

That’s what p*sses me off the most— the utter hypocrisy of those who wanted this to happen—or at the very least, created an environment where this was bound to happen—now claiming to be sorry and to offer support to the friends and family of the dead."

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 6:58 PM
-------

Several times here we've explored the issue of whether liberals in modern America have been more prone than conservatives to incite violence. It's a settled issue---you lose. Give it a rest.

Later, you (in the generic sense) can tell us again how it was whitey who had Malcom X killed. But please, have some sense of decency now. Even the most rabid of political extremists would not advocate an attack on this lady, of all people. If you think Angle or Sarah Palin are okay with this or that they are in some way responsible than you're an even bigger fool than you already seem.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 7:10 PM | Report abuse

'You're not only sick but pretty stupid. This was your sick and stupid comment:'

You're a sad case... sick and stupid yourself -- another guilty of projection. Why are you here when you hate Greg and just about everyone else here? Have you nothing else to do with your time? Go somewhere where you can find other depraved individuals to 'share' with.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 7:13 PM | Report abuse

fiona:

"I remember writing about being outraged by Sarah Palin’s cross-hair map."

DO you remember being outraged by the Democrat Leadership Council's shooting target map?

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253055&kaid=127&subid=171

I'm guessing no. Your outrage is almost certainly selective and manufactured. Regardless, it is stupid.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 8, 2011 7:18 PM | Report abuse

"Go somewhere where you can find other depraved individuals to 'share' with."

I'm paid, of course. Don't you listen to your brothers in hate? What's sad is that you waste your time playing your chorus role in the this far-left echo chamber. You've obviously never considered an idea outside your narrow ideology, and it shows. Probably why you are so angry and hateful as well.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 7:21 PM | Report abuse

You're a sad case... sick and stupid yourself -- another guilty of projection. Why are you here when you hate Greg and just about everyone else here? Have you nothing else to do with your time? Go somewhere where you can find other depraved individuals to 'share' with.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 7:13 PM
-----

I'm the one who's supposed to be "bent double like old beggars under sacks" with hate. Don't you read cao's posts? But he's mistaken; I don't hate you or him or Greg or anyone else. Sick and stupid maybe. Sad? Definitely not. Too many people in the world worse off than me.

Hey, what do you think of Dr. John?

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Geez ... can't this vitriol be turned off for even an act as heinous as this? The guy is obviously a whack job ... his politics are really irrelevant -- he was clearly irrational and psychotic.

Posted by: pragmaticagain | January 8, 2011 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Remember when this used to be an interesting, insightful place to comment? What ever happened to the thoughtful debate you could find here in the early days? I come back periodically, and it's like a damn 3 Stooges episode in here.

Posted by: Ranchero2 | January 8, 2011 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Brigade-

To clarify, I wasn't necessarily making a parallel between Angle's comment and this incident. As I stated above to tao-its far to early to draw conclusions WRT this incident.

Still, I think Angle's statement bears scrutiny (as it would with any candidate of any stripe). She was in effect saying that somewhere, someone or groups of people have the Second Amendment, in her opinion, as a remedy for political actions they disagree with. She is in effect saying that if you don't agree with a politician or a law, and "the vote" didn't get what you wanted, you have the right to bear arms as a remedy.

What exactly is that remedy? Seriously-this really has nothing to do with Angle, Reid, Democrats or Republicans.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Tucson police evacuate building after suspicious package found outside of Rep. Gifford's Arizona office.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 7:51 PM | Report abuse


"Several times here we've explored the issue of whether liberals in modern America have been more prone than conservatives to incite violence. It's a settled issue---you lose. Give it a rest."

Oh please, this is just silly... settled? By whom and what in your mind?

The guy is certainly a wack job, but they are influenced by what is out there, and the eliminationist rhetoric on the right for the past couple of years --including RFR's talk just today of how Giffords DESERVED this for her votes -- plus all the brandishing of assault weapons in public places and talk of second amendment solutions and putting public figures in crosshairs -- you know, it has an effect. You can't pretend it doesn't.

I love Dr. John, always have, where does that come from?

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 7:53 PM | Report abuse

"Geez ... can't this vitriol be turned off for even an act as heinous as this? The guy is obviously a whack job ... his politics are really irrelevant -- he was clearly irrational and psychotic."

Agreed.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 8, 2011 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Fiona

Please do not TWIST my words around


I did not say that.


However, you are engaging in ad hominem attacks and you are doing nothing but taking a horribly deceptive partisan lie campaign.


The Gunman said he like the Communist Manifesto - which makes him a LIBERAL, AND HE PROBABLY VOTED FOR OBAMA.


The Gunman clearly is disappointed in Obama - and Obama's failure to live up to his words.


YOU, on the other hand, are another reason why the liberals are so upset with the liberal rhetoric.

________________________


The gunman is CLEARLY REFERRING TO OBAMA


The Gunman asks:


What's government if words don't have meaning???


____________________________


The gunman is CLEARLY REFERRING TO OBAMA'S 2008 CAMPAIGN WORDS .......


Hear that Obama???


What is bipartisanship, if you refuse to meet with Republicans to negotiate after you are elected???


What is transparency, if you refuse to sign a release opening the file in Hawaii?


What is post-racial, if you insist on allowing your supports to LEVEL FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM???


What is post-partisanship, if you insist on reconciliation to impose a hyper-partisan agenda on the American People???


The DECEPTIONS AND LIES of the democrats DROVE THIS SHOOTER.


Take responsibility.


What is responsibility if you are seeking ways to blame the Tea Party???


.

So, you can BLAME OBAMA AND THE LIBERALS.

Case closed.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 8:04 PM | Report abuse

I love Dr. John, always have, where does that come from?

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 7:53 PM
-----

If you were Drindl from the Fix, you wouldn't have to ask. When she learned that I liked Dr. John, among others, she decided I must not be one of the horrible creatures she pictured all conservatives to be. Sort of like Broadwayjoe with Dale Robertson or Rory Calhoun or whoever it was that was a tea party big wig.

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

Law enforcement press conference: around 10:10 a.m. Local Time Tucson Gunman starting shooting (federal judge not target, in the wrong place at the wrong time). Sheriff attacks talk radio.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Fiona

You are clearly out-of-your-mind


The democrats have been poisoning the political atmosphere in this country for two years now.

The nation is enraged and angry that the democrats have acted AGAINST THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.


So, you can't deny that the democrats are PROVOKING PEOPLE.


Your statements have no basis whatsoever.


As predicted, you would WANT to blame the tea party, but you can not. It is ridiculous.

And you have also tried to blame Sarah Palin.

AND the truth is the guy has the Communist Manifesto on his website, which means he is a LEFT WING NUTJOB - JUST LIKE YOU.

Case closed.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 8:15 PM | Report abuse

prag


If I wasn't here, you, Fiona and the liberals would be having a field day blaming the Tea Party.


I speak the truth -


And the liberals have fallen silent.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Great Point from the comments:

To add a further hypocrisy of the disgusting and revolting Democrats:

If an Arab blows up a mall, they will "man the megaphones" with messages such as: "DO NOT INTERPRET THE ACTIONS OF THIS ONE PERSON AS IN ANY WAY INDICATING ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT THE CULTURE OR PERCEPTION OF ANY GROUP WHICH IN ANY CASE IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DEFINE"

In this case the conclusion is rather different. I also note that the Associated Press has jumped on the propaganda bandwagon by associating this with Sarah Palin despite there being no basis for that or even indication that the gunman pays more than an extremely superficial and deluded attention to politics.

I guess they hate Tea Partiers more than they hate Arabs, or they wouldn't put on the other cape for this particular conclusion.

Next question: "WHY DO THEY HATE US SO": Maybe Democrats should ask themselves more often why Americans, and not only Muslims, want to kill them? They have seemed keen on asking that question many times in the past, why not now?

.,

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Good night all.

Peace and safety to you and your families.

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

Democrat Sheriff decries vitriolic rhetoric and bigotry as responsible, blaming nameless talk radio and TV.

I wonder whether that includes his own vitriolic rhetoric last year calling AZ 170 racist and bigotted.

Quite a performance, Sheriff.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Rainforest is certainly stimulated, unnaturally so, by this shooting. How many posts has he written today? Unbalanced.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 8, 2011 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Per HuffPo

At 8.38PM ET

"Authorities are seeking a second suspect in today's shooting, Sheriff Dupnik confirms."
...................................
This atrocity might yet turn out to have many tentacles. The guy's computer or computers ,could lead the FBI to a wider ring.

I noticed, this afternoon, that three people had already checked off that the like option, on the guy's youtube crazy diatribe. The FBI might want to take a hard look at those three.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 9:10 PM | Report abuse

I noticed, this afternoon, that three people had already checked off that the like option, on the guy's youtube crazy diatribe. The FBI might want to take a hard look at those three.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 9:10 PM
-----

Keep an eye on caothien9. We need to know his exact whereabouts.

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Wondering if Fiona and 12 Bar blues are the same person.....

_____________________


Liam

Perhaps you should be investigated - you already tried to divert blame to "Sarah Palin" - so clearly you have a motive in throwing the authorities offtrack.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 8, 2011 9:15 PM | Report abuse

This might help flesh out the sort of person the captured guy is.

Of course, I find it hard to reconcile the headline: "friends describe him as a pot-smoking loner." Seems like a clear oxymoron. The call him a loner, and yet they say they are his friends.

http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-jared-lee-loughner-profile,0,3468158.story

"ktla.com
New Information Surfaces About Accused Tucson Mass Killer Jared Loughner
Friends describe him as a "pot-smoking loner."

KTLA News

5:14 PM PST, January 8, 2011
Advertisement

TUSCON, Ariz ( KTLA) -- Jared Lee Loughner, the alleged Tucson gunman, was described Saturday as a politically radical loner. Now an internet trail emerged in which he apparently railed against the US government and told friends: "Please don't be mad at me".

There are unconfirmed reports that 22 year old Jared Lee Loughner once met with Rep. Giffords in 2007. A former high school friend said that he had often talked about meeting and talking with the congresswoman.

Arizona court records show Loughner has twice been charged with previous offenses. The first, in October 2007, related to the possession of drug paraphernalia. It was unclear what the second, a year later, related to. Both charges were dismissed after Loughner completed a "diversion program".

People who knew him described him as philosophical, a person who read a lot of books. On his YouTube page, Loughner listed among his favorite books "The Communist Manifesto," "Siddhartha," "The Old Man And The Sea," "Gulliver's Travels," "Mein Kampf," "The Republic" and "Meno."

One former high school friend Tweeted about knowing the accused gunman:

"He was a pot head and into rock, like Hendrix, The Doors, Anti-Flag," she wrote. "I haven't seen him in person since 2007 in a sign language class. As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy. He had a lot of friends until he got alcohol poisoning in 2006 and dropped out of school. Mainly a loner, very philosophical."

Also on his YouTube page were several ranting videos. In one, Loughner wrote: "If you call me a terrorist then the argument to call me a terrorist is Ad hominem. You call me a terrorist. Thus, the argument to call me a terrorist is Ad hominem."

Loughner was taken into custody at the scene. Law enforcement officials said they believed he was a military veteran. "

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Shrink,

If your lurking, doesn't schizophrenia start in late teens / early twenties? Guy seems really nuts. The YouTube stuff is really incoherent.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 8, 2011 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Via TPM,

According to Sheriff Dupnik, Law Enforcement had prior contacts with the guy now in custody, because he had made prior threats to kill!

Looks like they guy should have not been allowed to slide, after he made more than one death threat. I wonder if he had been allowed to purchase the gun or guns, even though he had made death threats in the recent past.

""We're not convinced that he acted alone," Dupnik said of the suspect officials have in custody. "There is some reason to believe that he came to this location with some other individual."

Dupnik said law enforcement is "actively in pursuit of" of a certain individual, but that the person was only a "person of interest," and not a suspect, thus far.

At the news conference, law enforcement officials declined to identify the suspect in custody. Dupnik described the person as a 22-year old white male with a "criminal background" and "kind of a troubled past."

"There have been law enforcement contacts with the individual over he made threats [sic]," Dupnik said, adding that the threats were "to kill." "

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 9:38 PM | Report abuse

liam:
"There are unconfirmed reports that 22 year old Jared Lee Loughner once met with Rep. Giffords in 2007. A former high school friend said that he had often talked about meeting and talking with the congresswoman."

----

Maybe this guy was a stalker. If he was obsessed with meeting her, he may have felt rejected. In that case, it may have been personal rather than political and the others just innocents who happened to be there. Shrink?

Posted by: Brigade | January 8, 2011 9:46 PM | Report abuse

"What's enlightening is the warp-speed with which people jam a crime of indeterminate motive through their own personal political prism."

==

Hmm.

One of Palin's crosshaired Democrats is gunned down in public by a guy with a long trail of anti-government Tea Party rhetoric.

Yeah, it's all ideologically relative.

You. God. Damned. Moron.

Happy, wingnuts? This is exactly what you wanted. Happy with your Second Amendment? A mentally unstable wingnut is able to buy an automatic weapon and "take out" a dozen people.

Yeah, well-regulated militia. (spits)

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Heartbreaking.

"An uncle of the 9-year-old girl told the Arizona Republic that a neighbor was going to the event and invited her along because she had just been elected to the student council and was interested in government."

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 9:55 PM | Report abuse

"Hmm.

One of Palin's crosshaired Democrats is gunned down in public by a guy with a long trail of anti-government Tea Party rhetoric.

Yeah, it's all ideologically relative."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/74882/511/541568

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 8, 2011 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Cao.

Knock it off. Now is not the time for such partisan vitriol.

Besides; you have abandoned the political struggle here, and adopted a new homeland, so concentrate your political efforts in the land you now call home.

If you are homesick, then return to the USA, and if you are happy where you now are, then act like you are.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 10:00 PM | Report abuse

"Geez ... can't this vitriol be turned off for even an act as heinous as this? The guy is obviously a whack job ... his politics are really irrelevant -- he was clearly irrational and psychotic."

==

Nonsense. He's a mainstream Tea Party type, just actually doing wht the rest of them only talk about.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Cao.

Knock it off. Now is not the time for such partisan vitriol.

Besides; you have abandoned the political struggle here, and adopted a new homeland, so concentrate your political efforts in the land you now call home.

If you are homesick, then return to the USA, and if you are happy where you now are, then act like you are.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 10:02 PM | Report abuse

HAIKU:

Massacre today.

Rain Forest.

Multiple orgasms.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Or, on edit:

Rain Forest.

Multiple Orgasm.

Massacre.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:07 PM | Report abuse

"One of Palin's crosshaired Democrats is gunned down in public by a guy with a long trail of anti-government Tea Party rhetoric. "

The only information out so far indicates he is/was a leftwinger.

Long trail of TP rhetoric? You just made that up.

"Happy with your Second Amendment?"

It wouldn't protect an obvious paranoid schizophrenic. But happy we have it. Perhaps if a nearby good citizen had been carrying, the perp wouldn't have been able to shoot 19 people.

"A mentally unstable wingnut is able to buy an automatic weapon and "take out" a dozen people."

Mentally unstable, obviously, wingnut, no, no evidence of that. Automatic weapon? No. (Yet another topic on which you are as ignorant as you are self assured.) And I've seen no information on how or when he acquired the gun. Doubt you have either, since you just make stuff up as you rant.

Other than those glaring falsehoods and fictions, you are right on.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 10:08 PM | Report abuse

Or:

Rain Forest.

Massacre.

Multigasms.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:09 PM | Report abuse

Rainforest.

Obamagasm.

Multiply. Again.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:12 PM | Report abuse

The glaring failure that has jumped out a me is the fact that the sheriff revealed that they had already dealt with the guy before for making death threats. That is right; not one death threat, but death "threats", and yet they did not do a damn thing about it. They guy should have already been put away, as either a dangerous criminal, or as a dangerous mentally ill person, who needed to be institutionalized, just like the guy who killed John Lennon had to be.

I wonder how he came by the gun or guns, with his police record of having made death threats.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 8, 2011 10:14 PM | Report abuse

"What's enlightening is the warp-speed with which people jam a crime of indeterminate motive through their own personal political prism."

==

Hmm.

One of Palin's crosshaired Democrats is gunned down in public by a guy with a long trail of anti-government Tea Party rhetoric.
------------------------------------------------------------

You're late, you malignant, leprous, wormwood scum.

You're a liar. The suspect (your soulmate) wasn't old enough to have trail of anything, much less any identifiable rhetoric or ideology.

You are the classic (Chestertonian) "uncandid candid friend:" you say you are so concerned, so sad about the (alleged by you) fatal division and decline of your own country. But you're not sad, and you're not sorry.

You want this country, we people, to be at each others throats. You derive pleasure from this.

Take your poison home and suck the Mekong dry.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Rainforest, who in GOP is prosecuting fraudclosure? Last time you said you couldn't answer because congress wasn't in session, and it's been a long time. Since, you've jissomed the screen with your Obamagasm, you poor thing, you would find a way to masturb***ate even with saws for hands.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Rainforest is certainly stimulated, unnaturally so, by this shooting. How many posts has he written today? Unbalanced.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain |


he really got off on it, obviously. pagnello has him nailed... he loved it.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 10:17 PM | Report abuse

On good dkos link deserves another, and another . . .

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/7/17182/49781/669/509883

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/28/194921/076

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/6/0387/88142/753/431466


Good thing the country has kos to set high standards for discourse.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 10:23 PM | Report abuse

"I wonder how he came by the gun or guns, with his police record of having made death threats."

==

Are you joking? It's Arizona. He probably bought the gun from a vending machine in an airport

Se. McCain issued strongly-worded condemnation of the act. Good on him. Maybe it slipped his mind that the woman he chose as his Vice President issued encouragement for exactly this outcome for exactly this Congresswoman.

Oh, but that was just a metaphor for Griffin's electoral defeat.

And Angle's "Second Amendment solutions" was to. Gotcha.

Yeah let's all link arms with the wingnuts today.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:28 PM | Report abuse

QB:

Throw!, throw!

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Recipe:

Horseradishgasm for Rainforest.

Replace whole horseradish root to missing member, preferably upward for full simulative effect. With peeler in hand, practicing scraping hard upward. Whittle repeatedly taking care to place face near shorn roots and induce endless weeping.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Throw, then my lovely QB, throw! I convinced, I convinced!

Dumbass corporostatist.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:40 PM | Report abuse

"You are the classic (Chestertonian) "uncandid candid friend:" you say you are so concerned, so sad about the (alleged by you) fatal division and decline of your own country. But you're not sad, and you're not sorry."

Some stanzas from Bob Dylan, pegging the same false face of our own Colonel Kurtz:

"You say you lost your faith
But that’s not where it’s at
You had no faith to lose
And you know it

. . .

Do you take me for such a fool
To think I’d make contact
With the one who tries to hide
What he don’t know to begin with

You see me on the street
You always act surprised
You say, “How are you?” “Good luck”
But you don’t mean it

When you know as well as me
You’d rather see me paralyzed
Why don’t you just come out once
And scream it

No, I do not feel that good
When I see the heartbreaks you embrace
If I was a master thief
Perhaps I’d rob them

And now I know you’re dissatisfied
With your position and your place
Don’t you understand
It’s not my problem"


Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 10:43 PM | Report abuse

"But you're not sad, and you're not sorry.

You want this country, we people, to be at each others throats. You derive pleasure from this."

==

Shove it, tao9.

I grew up in the cradle of America with the echoes of the greatness America displayed in WWII still resounding around me. I was bursting with pride to be American because I really believed that Americans were good and America was great.

Past tense.

I derive no pleasure from this. I awoke to a ping on my iPad from the NYTimes app and when I followed the notification and read it my stomach went into knots. I didn't puke but I came close.

I don't like this one goddamned bit and you can flush down the drain as green piss for suggesting it.

And no I dont want Americans at each others' throats. I want hate groups infiltrated and their leaders arrested, and I want back an America where my earlier delusions are sustainable.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 10:47 PM | Report abuse

One of my favorite songs. Decadence starts when counter culture isn't counter enough and when the likes of you start assimilating everything into corporate benignity..

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:47 PM | Report abuse

And for those of you who are all appalled, well, I was appalled today too,

yesterday,

the day before,

and before...

What took you fools so long?

The merry-go-round was spinning too much?

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:49 PM | Report abuse

This papagnello thing is needy. Lol

I've killed gnats who were more interesting. Enjoy your self-amusement.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 10:56 PM | Report abuse

"where my earlier delusions are sustainable"

at last, a true writer!

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:56 PM | Report abuse

I do enjoy myself. Gotta problem QB?

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 10:57 PM | Report abuse

Conservatives should be collectively gassed.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 20, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse
----------------------------------------------------------

You're a liar and a sociopath; you're as happy as a little girl.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 10:58 PM | Report abuse

"I've killed gnats who were more interesting"

Perfect, thanks, I'll use that one.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 11:00 PM | Report abuse

I wonder where the balance lies today between repudiation and glee on the wingnut sites?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:04 PM | Report abuse

How sad it is to see Dylan misappropiatedm defrauded and distorted this way.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 8, 2011 11:05 PM | Report abuse

"I do enjoy myself."

With all your beater references upthread I'm not surprised.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 11:06 PM | Report abuse

You're a liar and a sociopath; you're as happy as a little girl.

==

I'm being called a sociopath by a guy whose ideology says it's wrong to not let people starve to death.


'Scuse me I need to go make a diary entry.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:09 PM | Report abuse

"I derive no pleasure from this. I awoke to a ping on my iPad from the NYTimes app and when I followed the notification and read it my stomach went into knots. I didn't puke but I came close."

Such that his first reaction was to hop on the web from up the river and from whole cloth call the psycho who shot 19 people including a nine-year-old girl a TP activist doing TP work.

We are so blessed by your absence.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 8, 2011 11:10 PM | Report abuse

No, no problem, nothing wrong with beating, the question is, why do you do it all the time and think something's wrong with it? After all, here you are, all political etc., and who gives a fart about your snideness as transparent as you are?

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 11:10 PM | Report abuse

And I assure you, my wife is far more beautiful than whatever you got going beside your hand and your mouth.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 11:12 PM | Report abuse

We will win. You will lose.

Good night.

Posted by: Papagnello | January 8, 2011 11:13 PM | Report abuse

{...}
ON Loughner's Facebook page -- his 'likes' are Sarah Palin -- she of the Giffords in the crosshairs -- and Tea Party Patriots.
{...}
Posted by: fiona5
-----------------------------------------------------------

I haven't seen this reported anywhere, also haven't seen reported anywhere that he had a Facebook page.

link?

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 11:15 PM | Report abuse

"my wife is far more beautiful"

Must be one of the heavy mil poly inflatables.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Papagnello, like the haikus but you really shouldn't waste your time with qb. I'm pretty sure "he's" just a scriptbot. Like three pages of Perl or Lua.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:19 PM | Report abuse

Next tao will be saying that Palin never had a crosshairs map, Angle never spoke of RKBA solutions.

Face it, righties, killing people isn't incidental or marginal to your outlook. Political violence in America isn't entirely rightwing but only the most careful and exacting scholarship needs to note that.

Facebook, YouTube, whatever, the guy linked to Palin's crosshairs page.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Wow, what a sad day. Did not expect to come back to this news upon coming home. It's times like this I'm glad to have the blocker so I don't have to see the repugnant filth that Brigade and rainforest are putting out there.

There are politically motivated murders such as the one of the Kansas doc and the attempt on Tom Periello's brother, but I don't think this falls under that category. I think it's clear that I don't mince words if I think one political ideology is at fault, but I don't think this is the case here.

There are six dead, including a 9 year old. Let's hope that is all.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 8, 2011 11:31 PM | Report abuse

Prove it, liar.

Give us a link, lemur.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 11:33 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD, well said; & my 11:33 above wasn't for you.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 11:36 PM | Report abuse

Find your own link, twink.

And who's "us," wuss?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:43 PM | Report abuse

@bernie: "I advise that folks clear their troll hunter lists temporarily and read what RainForestRising has been writing."

Not interested. But thanks.

@Pagagnello: "And I assure you, my wife is far more beautiful than whatever you got going beside your hand and your mouth."

While it's great that 13 year olds are interested in politics, this particular debating tactic might be more at home in a talkback at Ain't It Cool News.

@qb: "The only information out so far indicates he is/was a leftwinger."

Everything I've heard indicates he was not partisan--he was more of a paranoid conspiracy theorist with his own, obsessive, fetishized issues. Those folks sometimes exhibit the behavior of extreme lefties or righties, but, more often, tend to give both sides something the other side can latch on to. In the end, what does it matter if he was a lefty or a righty or on team Edward or team Jacob? He opened fire on a crowd of innocent people participating the political process. He killed a 9 year old girl. This was an act of terrorism. Plain and simple.

Normally, I'm against torture as a form of punishment, but I'm open to argument that, sometimes, exceptions should be made.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 8, 2011 11:44 PM | Report abuse

C'mon, Kevin. "Torture"?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 8, 2011 11:54 PM | Report abuse

@pragmatic: "Geez ... can't this vitriol be turned off for even an act as heinous as this?"

No. Indeed, when a tragic or momentous event occurs, what is the first (or second) reaction of the addict?

"Dang, this if f****d up. I gotta get high."

While it seems, in the abstract, that it should be easy not to do--just don't stick the needle in in the first place!--in practice, it can be quite difficult to go cold turkey.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 8, 2011 11:56 PM | Report abuse

cao lợn heo,

You're the Haiphong Iago making the assertion. There is no link, liar.

And "Us" are citizens of this country, with our families and lives here...

...Blessedly relieved of boneless carp swimming through sewage to Cambodia.

Posted by: tao9 | January 8, 2011 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Wow, what a sad day. Did not expect to come back to this news upon coming home. It's times like this I'm glad to have the blocker so I don't have to see the repugnant filth that Brigade and rainforest are putting out there.

==

When the page load is slow you can get glimpses before the blocker kicks in and wth so much in caps you get to read a lttle. It's every bit as vile as you might think.

And needless to say, Jake agrees with him

Posted by: caothien9 | January 8, 2011 11:58 PM | Report abuse

"And needless to say, Jake agrees with him."

Get a mirror, Gemini.

{{{se terminer}}}

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 12:04 AM | Report abuse

@ChuckInDenton: "C'mon, Kevin. 'Torture'?"

You're right, of course. Thank you. When people open fire on a crowd of innocent people and kill several of them (including 9 year old girl), my more cro-magnon instincts kick in, as they are wont to do. But, yes, fine. Shame on me. I am a bad person.

Yes, I know. Irrational. Mentally ill. More broken than evil.

I try to keep that in mind.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Ironically, the 9-year-old girl, Christina Taylor, was included in a book, "Faces of Hope: Babies Born on 9/11."

http://books.google.com/books?id=VayUKdTuI7kC&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&dq=%22Christina+Taylor%22+Faces+of+Hope,+Babies+Born+on+9/11&source=bl&ots=RqxbHxUQjR&sig=3HBQ6MyM1ElcS6ksoUA9KdadPwE&hl=en&ei=tispTdPHH82r8AaNnpWmAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 9, 2011 12:06 AM | Report abuse

It would be "con hèo lơn," nobody would ever refer to a pig as being "cao." And if they did for whatever reason it would be "con hèo cao lơn." It's a language where the noun follows the adjective as in Spanish, except for Chinese phrases in the high vocabulary like Đại Học, "university."

So you claim to speak for all US citizens, huh? Grandeur much?

Wow, so baby makes three.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 12:07 AM | Report abuse

@cao: "Face it, righties, killing people isn't incidental or marginal to your outlook. Political violence in America isn't entirely rightwing but only the most careful and exacting scholarship needs to note that."

Well, we crazed conservatives don't seem to be reforming ourselves. What's the solution, do you think?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 12:09 AM | Report abuse

Yes, I know. Irrational. Mentally ill. More broken than evil.

==

yeah we get this every time a right winger acts out right wing rhetoric. First they say he's a lefty and when that doesn't wash they say he's a mentally ill lone wolf.

The fact that righties have been flirting with assassination rhetoric for two years, pshaw, coincidence.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 12:17 AM | Report abuse

Too bad about the Saints. DDAWD hasn't been this sick since GW Bush dynamited the levees in New Orleans.

Papagnello now refers to Rosie as "his wife."

I see cao's sling poop again.

Another blast from the past:

---

New Posters:

Please be aware that on this blog a certain poster known as neocolor (aka the Ped) handles all topics and subject matter. Do not fear, there are only three that she ever chooses:

1. Vietnam
2. men on men sexual escapades
3. she's right, you're wrong

If the Ped still has her face down in a pillow, drivl will handle all content. this is more of a random fashion, closely mirroring Kos of Huff in it's topic of the hour rants. (in fact an exact copy).

Please comply or be insulted and demanded to be banned.

Over and out.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 28, 2010 8:35 PM


Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Well, we crazed conservatives don't seem to be reforming ourselves. What's the solution, do you think?

===

Let you guys secede and avoid the downwind

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 12:22 AM | Report abuse

@cao: "yeah we get this every time a right winger acts out right wing rhetoric. First they say he's a lefty and when that doesn't wash they say he's a mentally ill lone wolf. The fact that righties have been flirting with assassination rhetoric for two years, pshaw, coincidence."

You've identified the problem, Cao. But what's the answer?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 12:23 AM | Report abuse

@brigade,

You seem obsessed. Give it up. Most people don't even know who you are talking about. Ped? bumblingberry? drivl? It's too much of an inside the Fix story. There are maybe three of us who can follow the script.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 12:25 AM | Report abuse

Cao: Secession? That's the answer?

After all that fine bellyachin', I was really expecting something a little bit more involved, like one of those Freddy Jone's traps at the end of Scooby Doo (circa the 1969 season). "First, we'll tempt them all into the warehouse with a bucket of fried chicken and a pouch of chewin' tobacco. Then, we'll put axel grease on this waterslide and attached it to this rocket propelled washing machine . . . "

And there we'd be, our masks pulled off to reveal our true, sallow, toothless faces: "And we woulda gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!"

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 12:27 AM | Report abuse

@brigade,

You seem obsessed. Give it up. Most people don't even know who you are talking about. Ped? bumblingberry? drivl? It's too much of an inside the Fix story. There are maybe three of us who can follow the script.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 12:25 AM
-----

If they've been hanging around here, they know.

Posted by: Brigade | January 9, 2011 12:29 AM | Report abuse

BTW: How long does it take to pull a tooth? Nuthin'? All day?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 12:29 AM | Report abuse

Apparently even Popper is falsifiable then.

I was not misunderstood, and in a language not my own in the bargain.

How would one say "caothien9, the squealing pig spawn of Baal" in the high vocabulary at Đại Học?

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 12:32 AM | Report abuse

You've identified the problem, Cao. But what's the answer?
--------------------------------------------------
I will wait for more information to know this shooter's exact motivation. However, I do think the inflammatory rhetoric about second amendment remedies, and the allusions to violence as *the* solution to political problems, have gone WAY too far. Unbalanced people (if that's what this guy is) react to incendiary talk by taking the violence talk literally.

Everyone, including talk radio and pols and blogs, everyone, needs to tone it down. That's the answer. I don't have much hope though.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 12:32 AM | Report abuse

@brigade,

You seem obsessed. Give it up. Most people don't even know who you are talking about. Ped? bumblingberry? drivl? It's too much of an inside the Fix story. There are maybe three of us who can follow the script.

==

And two fewer who care. Is he still fulminating about li'l ol' moi?

Lấy đi một cuộc sống, Brigade.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 12:34 AM | Report abuse

"I will wait for more information to know this shooter's exact motivation."

The shooter is a nutbag. What we need to look for are people saying things along the line of "The shooter was wrong, but..."

Posted by: DDAWD | January 9, 2011 12:35 AM | Report abuse

Brigade, you seem obsessed. It doesn't serve you.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 12:35 AM | Report abuse

What we need to look for are people saying things along the line of "The shooter was wrong, but..."

I don't understand.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | January 9, 2011 12:42 AM | Report abuse

@12Bar: "Everyone, including talk radio and pols and blogs, everyone, needs to tone it down. That's the answer. I don't have much hope though."

Well, I think that should happen, period. I don't think it's going to stop crazy people. But it certainly doesn't help anything.

But, like you, I don't hold out much hope for that.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 9, 2011 12:44 AM | Report abuse

I was not misunderstood, and in a language not my own in the bargain.

How would one say "caothien9, the squealing pig spawn of Baal" in the high vocabulary at Đại Học?

==

So you went to an online translator. That takes almost as much skill as Google. Revel in your time!

Let me take a crack at it .. "Cao Thiên Số Chín, con trai của Baal tiếng kêu ré lên như con hèo.."

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 12:45 AM | Report abuse

"Cao Thiên Số Chín, con trai của Baal tiếng kêu ré lên như con hèo.."

Hey, now I've got an icebreaker opening line if I ever get to Saigon!

Almost as much skill as finding a report that confirms Loughner linked Palin or TP.

He did link a Dead Pool song.

Pond would be good for you.

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 1:04 AM | Report abuse

"What we need to look for are people saying things along the line of "The shooter was wrong, but..."

Look at people like Bill O'Reilly after the murder of the abortion doc. Superficially condemning the murder but essentially saying "but it's his own fault for performing the abortions"

I'm not willing to pin this on any ideology now, but we could easily see people like Sean Hannity excuse the shooter on the basis of liberal ideology. I won't assume he will, but if he does, he deserves to be forcefully condemned.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 9, 2011 1:09 AM | Report abuse

meant Drowning Pool (aka: not coldplay)

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 1:10 AM | Report abuse

Well, I think that should happen, period. I don't think it's going to stop crazy people. But it certainly doesn't help anything.

==

No it's not going to stop people from being crazy but just look at how many of the assassins and attempted assassins from the past few years got amped up by Limbaugh, or Beck, or other right-wing radio nutjobs. Like that guy who was picked up with trunk of ammo headed to that Tides place nobody ever heard of until Beck started writing it on his whiteboard

Take away that firehose of hate and the crazies are going to be less likely to obsess over imaginary enemies and instead spend more time listening to secret alien messages on the radio and joining weird religious cults who think that when you die your soul goes to a garage in Brooklyn or something.

When people keep getting told by impressarios that they're about to be enveloped in tyranny and socialism, some of them are going to act in their defense. And that gets people killed.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 1:11 AM | Report abuse

~~~~Prayers, please, for all~~~~

& a prayer tonight for cao from tao. heh!

on the flip...

Posted by: tao9 | January 9, 2011 1:14 AM | Report abuse

I'm not willing to pin this on any ideology now, but we could easily see people like Sean Hannity excuse the shooter on the basis of liberal ideology. I won't assume he will, but if he does, he deserves to be forcefully condemned.

==

But condemnation is something we've forgotten how to do. Maybe we didn't hear it right, maybe we don't know the whole story, maybe we're being subjective, maybe we're being judgmental, maybe Hannity has unresolved toilet training issues we need to be more sensitive too, maybe we need to be more open minded ...

And in our handkerchief-wringing over inclusivity and tolerance we cede the floor to people with no scruples at all.

Oh if only liberals and Democrats WERE willing to condemn. Starting with Obama condemning Republican behavior the past two years.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 1:19 AM | Report abuse

"
Take away that firehose of hate and the crazies are going to be less likely to obsess over imaginary enemies and instead spend more time listening to secret alien messages on the radio and joining weird religious cults who think that when you die your soul goes to a garage in Brooklyn or something.

When people keep getting told by impressarios that they're about to be enveloped in tyranny and socialism, some of them are going to act in their defense. And that gets people killed."

What percentage of the population is susceptible to an impresarios, do you think?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 1:27 AM | Report abuse

What percentage of the population is susceptible to an impresarios, do you think?

==

With over 300 million people in the USA to drop on that bell curve, how big a percentage do you need?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 1:35 AM | Report abuse

No percentage desired, on my part, just curious what your opinion was on the percent of the population could be motivated to violence by impresarios?  Do you think a discernible percentage of the violence that occurs in this country every year is a result of these impresarios influencing the susceptible?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 1:42 AM | Report abuse

Hey, now I've got an icebreaker opening line if I ever get to Saigon!

Almost as much skill as finding a report that confirms Loughner linked Palin or TP.

==

I don't live in Saigon, and I avoid the place like I avoid tobacco smoke. It's crowded and polluted and it takes hours to get anywhere.

Dude, the first article I read this morning mentioned the Palin crosshairs map. It was in the NYT. It's possible I read it wrong and the guy didn't have it on his YouTube page, it's possible I read it right and he did, who cares? We both know that Palin and Angle and others have invoked assassination rhetoric and that Giffords was explicitly named. We both know that the right wing has been buying guns and ammo like the Second is about to expire for two years now. We both know that this guy was amped up over tyranny speech. And we both know who's doing the speaking. So quit it.

Suppose this guy had shot McCain? What liberal commentators could you point to and say "this could have been predicted?" Zero.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 1:47 AM | Report abuse

Do you think a discernible percentage of the violence that occurs in this country every year is a result of these impresarios influencing the susceptible?

==

Why are you asking my opinion over stuff that's been reported in the news? I already mentioned that guy who got pulled over with a trunk full of guns on his way to Tides, and nobody ever blood HEARD of Tides before Beck started weaving it into his feverish conspiracy imaginings.

The guy who flew a plane into the IRS had been amped up by talk radio.

The guy who shot Tiller, ditto.

Telling crazy people that there are conspiracies to take them away is like giving them LSD. It's irresponsible. Telling people that the country is being run by a clandestine Muslim socialist is going to inflame a predictable number of them to do something about it personally. It only takes one, so quit needling about percentages.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 1:53 AM | Report abuse

"The House was set to vote Wednesday on the new Republican majority’s proposal to repeal the health care law that had energized their supporters and ignited opposition from the Tea Party movement. Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the new majority leader, said Saturday that the vote and other planned legislative activity would be postponed.

The original health care legislation stirred strong feelings that flared at angry town hall meetings held by many Democratic lawmakers during the summer of 2009. And there has been broader anger and suspicion rising about the government, its finances and its goals, with the discourse partially fueled by talk shows and Web sites."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/us/politics/09capital.html?hp

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 2:08 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, not trying to nitpick, though the question about how much violence, a percentage, is inspired by impresarios is valid.  1%? 5%? 10%?

"Oh if only liberals and Democrats WERE willing to condemn. Starting with Obama condemning Republican behavior the past two years."

What kind of condemnation would satisfy you?  What kind would make you think the country is starting to "wake up"?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 9, 2011 2:08 AM | Report abuse

@Kevin-

If you are still reading. Bad day all 'round.

Word.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 9, 2011 2:16 AM | Report abuse

This is as far as I go, Troll, you aren't looking for a real debate, you're trying to needle me into some expression of exasperation that you (and qb) are going to embellish with some Pol Pot and Stalin and repost hourly for the next few months. Not providing it, why don't you just do like qb and make it up.

Have a nice weekend.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 2:17 AM | Report abuse

"Ms. Giffords was interviewed on Fox news on Friday...I hope that had nothing to do with this"

What could it possibly have to do with it?

==

Maybe you could find a fourth grader to connect the dots for you.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 2:28 AM | Report abuse

Someone else invoked assassination rhetoric too:

http://digg.com/news/politics/Why_the_RFK_gaffe_will_end_Hillary_Clinton_s_Campaign

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 9, 2011 3:03 AM | Report abuse

The lame duck session has now led to killing


All the democrats who supported pushing the liberal agenda through during the lame duck session - knowing full well the democrats lost the election - ARE NOW GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER.


Case closed.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 3:27 AM | Report abuse

A group of people do not spend the past two years inflaming the political atmosphere

.... and purposely getting people angry at them


.... and ignoring the election in Massachusetts



..... and pushing through their agenda with "reconciliation"


.... and ignoring the November election

.... and ignoring that they lost the November election


... and continuing to push through their liberal agenda in a lame duck session after they lost the election



---- AND NOT EXPECT TO PROVOKE SOMEONE INTO A VIOLENT ACT



the democrats ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVOKING THIS ACT


THE DEMOCRATS ARE NOT GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER



Obama should resign immediately.



People have died because of Obama's arrogance and Obama's refusal to be bipartisan,


Obama's refusal to be post-racial


Obama's refusal to be transparent


Obama's insistence on LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE


Obama is GUILTY



Case closed.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 3:34 AM | Report abuse

This guy seems somewhat right wing to me. Burning the flag and saying the communist manifesto is your favorite books aside. He also lists Ayn Rand as a favorite and Brave New World and Orwell 1984, anti-communist literature. Libertarians don't support outlawing flag burning. Let's count the ways: A belief that expansive government power is infringing on civil rights. Check. Sound money policy backed by commodities. Check. Competing currencies e.g. Hayek. Check. Strict constitutionalism. Check. Anti-Federalist. Check. This guy sounds to me like a Jeffersonian opposed to a national bank and a libertarian type with some Ron Paulish monetary policy ideas. Am I right or am I right?

Posted by: Truthteller12 | January 9, 2011 3:35 AM | Report abuse

Aw, Jeebus. The sad MoFo was was a sick SOB.

There are extremists at any time, in any place. The ideology doesn't matter. He was young and f*ckd up.

The real question is, are we as a society going to continue to work with each other??

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 9, 2011 3:47 AM | Report abuse

Well it's not gonna be the chairman of the PTA who snaps, now is it. It's going to be some marginal weirdo who shares the same hatred and fear as the rest of his fellow righties but is a little shorthanded in the the perspective and self-restraint departments.

So Sarah took down the crosshairs map. She "prays" for Giffords' family. Where was all that humane concern before she got her ration of special attention by putting out the hit-list in the first place?

Crocodile tears. i say charge hervwith incitement to murder.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 4:50 AM | Report abuse

"I have to get a tooth pulled today."

==

Hate losin' them big ones

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 5:05 AM | Report abuse

cao

“It's irresponsible. Telling people that the country is being run by a clandestine Muslim socialist is going to inflame a predictable number of them to do something about it personally.”

Is telling people that conservatives should be gassed irresponsible or likely to inflame a predictable number of people to do something about it?

“Maybe you could find a fourth grader to connect the dots for you.”

So I guess that means you haven’t any idea.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 9, 2011 7:37 AM | Report abuse

I think some people are missing something. Yes, the assassin was nuts. By definition we can say that. But what he did may still have been catalyzed or precipitated by Right Wing hate rhetoric. The two are not mutually exclusive at all.

One other point: other than Tao, I will no longer acknowledge the Conservatives on this blog. I went through the entire thread and I encourage others to do the same. You will see that the Conservatives here -- Scott, QB, Battleground, Clawrence, Brigade, etc. -- exhibited not the least bit of compassion or human feeling over these murders. Their only thought was to mount a tactical political defense for Conservative hate tactics. Whether these people are paid professional or whether they are psychopaths matters little to me. They are part of the Right Wing hate machine and I have no use for them.

I hope the Congresswoman recovers. And I hope that leading Republicans and Conservatives will condemn the hatred and nihilism spewed daily by the Right Wing hate machine.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 7:47 AM | Report abuse

Of maps and targets and hypocrisy and opportunism.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2653696/posts

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 7:56 AM | Report abuse

Scott, if you can't distinguish between some clearly recognizable hyperbole on a blog from a nationally publicized clearly recognizable statement of incitement by a national political party, then you need to go find yourself a shrink.

Grip <--- get one at a Piggly-Wiggly near you

Posted by: caothien9 | January 9, 2011 8:09 AM | Report abuse

All, here's a fresh Open Thread for you:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/sunday_open_thread_16.html

Great stuff yesterday, thanks!

Posted by: Greg Sargent | January 9, 2011 8:12 AM | Report abuse

Kevin,

"Everything I've heard indicates he was not partisan--he was more of a paranoid conspiracy theorist with his own, obsessive, fetishized issues."

I agree with you. I was merely rebutting the aburdity and obvious dishonesty of the latter day Colonel Kurtz in spouting the lefty echo chamber claim that the perp is a Palinite/TPartier.

I'm not going to be at all tolerant of these creeps who wasted no time in politicizing this, including that irresponsible and malignant Sheriff. Eight years of Bush and Cheney = Hitler, Bush assassination fantasies, Alec Baldwin, Randi Rhoads, Keith Olberman, Ed Shultz, "snipers wanted," DailyKos, "war criminal," and on and on. The party of Alan Grayson, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, a President who calls his opponents hostage takers and liars. Blogs like this one that literally welcome a lunatic who advocates mass killing of opponents. Heck, we even have DKos blaming the right and Palin after DKos itself put Giffords on a "dead to me" list and a "bullseye" list to have a primary challenge.

I just saw CNN reporters say there is no evidence at all that the perp had any Palin or TP allegiances at all. But that doesn't matter to these wretched and malevolent liars like cao and Ethan and Fiona . . . all of them lemming-like following their ideological masters like Jane Fonda, Paul Krugman, and the jacka** Pima Sheriff, who ought to be removed from office today, not tomorrow.

There are going to be a thousand apologies owed by the left for this. Not one will ever be given, because that's just how they roll.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 8:15 AM | Report abuse

cao:

"Scott, if you can't distinguish between some clearly recognizable hyperbole on a blog from a nationally publicized clearly recognizable statement of incitement by a national political party..."

The only difference is the size of the audience. So are you saying that your statements are not irresponsible simply because so few people pay attention to you?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 9, 2011 8:21 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne, I'm glad to hear you are going to stop lying about me, since indeed posted compassion or human feeling above how "shocked and saddened to hear about the terrible tragedy that took place in Tucson [yesterday]. It is appalling that anyone would commit such unthinkable violence against Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, her staff, a sitting federal judge, and the many other victims and families impacted. These heinous crimes have no place in America, and they are especially grievious when committed against our elected officials. Spirited debate is desireable in our country, but it only should be the clash of ideas."

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 9, 2011 8:26 AM | Report abuse

I was gone all afternoon and into the evening and came back to find a comment section full of mud slinging and just about as much vitriol as we've come to expect in the blogosphere. I love free speech, free speech and a free press are two of our most basic and essential liberties, thank-you founding fathers.

Obviously though, our words have consequences. Who knows if this guy's head was full of words and images of an overbearing government trying to manipulate our minds through grammar (of all things) brought to him by political rhetoric or his own fevered imagination (my guess)? He sounds like he's somewhere between borderline and full blown schizophrenic to me.

I'd guess Sarah Palins little cross hairs map had nothing to do with his shooting spree, and he was responsible for his own actions anyway, but I do think it makes SP look both foolish and irresponsible now that the worst has occurred. I'd also venture a guess that her presidential aspirations are probably over, fair or not, precisely because words DO have consequences.

I think that's a good lesson for all of us. I know there are a few people on this board I've lost respect for over the last year or so, and they're not all conservatives. No big deal, I'm just an old hippie from CA, but I may not be the only one. If you want your views and opinions to be respected by others, you also need to show respect for differing opinions. I think we've lost the civility quotient in our discourse and if our political leaders can't or won't lead by example, does that really excuse us?

When did we go from saying "that's a stupid idea" to "you're stupid" and why?

Posted by: lmsinca | January 9, 2011 8:26 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne,

You have no idea how bereft we'll all feel that you don't "acknowledge" us (not). Just so you know, it won't make any difference at all to whether I choose to refute your screeds.

Bright and early in the morning, here you are to politicize the crime. Big of you. Very compassionate.

You're also really upset, we can see, with your pals Ethan, fiona, cao and others for wasting no time yesterday getting to the point and blaming Palin, the TP, talk radio, etc. Oh, wait, I guess you failed to mention that.

I watched the news for a while yesterday after I got back from sled riding with my daughter and checked in here to see Ethan be the first to weigh in with politicizing the crime. Pretty bizarre of you to turn around condemnations of those calumnies as a "tactical defense" of hate. But then you're like that.

"And I hope that leading Republicans and Conservatives will condemn the hatred and nihilism spewed daily by the Right Wing hate machine."

Spoken by someone who spends a part of every day here spewing hatred as part of the left-wing hate and noise machine. But we can all see your instincts are all about compassion and your heart is in the right place here (not).


Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 8:31 AM | Report abuse

Good one, quarterback1. I think that wbgonne is projecting.

Brigade also pled with fiona5: "have some sense of decency now. Even the most rabid of political extremists would not advocate an attack on this lady, of all people."

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 9, 2011 8:37 AM | Report abuse

lms,

"I'd guess Sarah Palins little cross hairs map had nothing to do with his shooting spree, and he was responsible for his own actions anyway, but I do think it makes SP look both foolish and irresponsible now that the worst has occurred."

It doesn't make her look foolish and irresponsible except in the eyes of people who for political objectives draw fanciful connections to things that aren't connected. Btw, Palin's map didn't use rifle crosshairs; it used a surveyor's symbol. Democrats have repeatedly published maps with targets over Republican districts. The DNC itself did it last year. But IOKIYAD.

I called this dim bulb fiona stupid when she immediately leaped to blame Palin and the right (spreading lies in the process) and then couldn't comprehend why that would be offensive. I'll stand by that judgment. The people on this thread who rushed to politicize the crime are sick and stupid, and hypocrites one and all. I see no reason to mince words about that.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 8:49 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne:

"You will see that the Conservatives here -- Scott, QB, Battleground, Clawrence, Brigade, etc. -- exhibited not the least bit of compassion or human feeling over these murders."

And, of course, the reluctance to engage in maudlin displays of public emotion with complete strangers is undeniable proof of a lack of caring and compassion.

Get over your self-righteous self, wbgonne.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 9, 2011 8:50 AM | Report abuse

qb

I agree with you re politicizing this event, but it will happen whether we want it to or not. What I'm saying is regardless of the truth of the matter, the words we use to describe our opponents or exaggerate their positions can come back to haunt us later. None of us are immune from that, not the SP's, the Alan Graysons, the Ethans, Fionas, Caos, Claws, Taos or you or me. Does anyone take responsibility for their own behavior or language anymore, or are we doomed to either play the victim or say "he started it" forever?

Posted by: lmsinca | January 9, 2011 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Scott,

Indeed.

I always wonder, when I see those "public" displays of compassion and "prayers for the victims," how many prayers are actually going to be said and tears shed. Not that I doubt compassion is felt, but I sense that the public display is often the extent of it.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 8:58 AM | Report abuse

For the record, I think political partisanship is stupid and inhibits the nation. That goes as much for Democrats as Republicans. However, there are striking differences between the Democrats and the Republicans regarding the hate that has evidently turned AZ into a seething cauldron.

First, the Right Wing Hate Machine has been antigovernment vitriol for years now and it continues to ratchet up the vitriol as the days go by. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the even more extreme wannabes on local radio are vile, evil, despicable people without civic decency or honor. They are deadly parasites attacking the glue that holds our society together. The Left, in contrast, generally serves as a punching bag for the Right Wing Hate Machine and barely manages to defend itself. No, the Left and the Right are not the same in this regard. Not at all.

Second, the killer shot a Democrat in a Republican district. He shot point-blank in the head a Democrat who had been repeatedly targeted and demonized by the Right Wing Hate Machine in AZ. It would be surprising to me if partisan Democrats on political chat boards did not react viscerally to these despicable acts. I imagine that if the shoe were on the other foot we'd be hearing far worse from the Republicans.

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

I apologize to Kevin W, who like Tao, exhibits fundamental human decency. The rest of you Conservatives make me sick.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 9:02 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne, please stop acknowledging us. Everyone already knows that the Left-Wing Hate Machine has an eight-year headstart on antigovernment vitriol, especially against GWB.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 9, 2011 9:12 AM | Report abuse

I agree with RainForestRising.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 8, 2011 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Go away you rotten creep.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 9:14 AM | Report abuse

wb,

Truly, your hypocrisy and self-blindness know no bounds. Each word you type further proves it.

Be sure to catch Olbermann tomorrow night. I'm sure he'll have lots of sober analysis for you.

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

qb

I don't watch Olberman (too pompous for me) but occasionally read his special comments, he issued one already and here's the closing:

"He concluded his special comment with this powerful statement, including an apology for his own actions: "Violence, or the threat of violence, has no place in our Democracy, and I apologize for and repudiate any act or any thing in my past that may have even inadvertently encouraged violence. Because for whatever else each of us may be, we all are Americans."

Posted by: lmsinca | January 9, 2011 9:35 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne:

"You will see that the Conservatives here -- Scott, QB, Battleground, Clawrence, Brigade, etc. -- exhibited not the least bit of compassion or human feeling over these murders."

And, of course, the reluctance to engage in maudlin displays of public emotion with complete strangers is undeniable proof of a lack of caring and compassion.

Get over your self-righteous self, wbgonne.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 9, 2011 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Scott,

Indeed.

I always wonder, when I see those "public" displays of compassion and "prayers for the victims," how many prayers are actually going to be said and tears shed. Not that I doubt compassion is felt, but I sense that the public display is often the extent of it.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 9, 2011 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Psychopaths.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 9, 2011 9:41 AM | Report abuse

So much for you "no longer acknowledg[ing] the Conservatives on this blog." I knew that it was too good to be true.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 9, 2011 9:48 AM | Report abuse

What is it with Brigade and all these names and crap? 12 Bar, does he have a crush on cao or something?

He doesn't seem to ever stop thinking about him -- it's pretty creepy.

Posted by: fiona5 | January 9, 2011 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Fiona - you are 12Bar


Now you are pretending to have a conversation with yourself so everyone will think you are two people

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 9, 2011 12:11 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