How slimy can you get??

[GoSlash27]

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/rep-giffords-hero-intern-congresswoman-alert/story?id=12575308
The bodies aren't even cold yet and they're already trying to twist it to their political advantage!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq38Nnf4pOw

TEA Party types do not list "Communist Manifesto" as their favorite book on their MySpace page. People who follow Sarah Palin do not post things like "My congresswoman voted against Pelosi and now she's dead to me" on Daily Kos.

I will not allow these political opportunists to twist this incident to shut me up. It's tragic and it ain't my fault. They can all rot in Hell. :thumbdown:

[Akagi]

Oh, I dunno.

"Palin's Facebook page in March posted a U.S. map with the cross-hairs of a gun scope imposed over each of the 20 Democrats' districts. 'We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list," Giffords said at the time. "The way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they've got to realize there are consequences to that action.'"

[LLT]

"Palin's Facebook page in March posted a U.S. map with the cross-hairs of a gun scope imposed over each of the 20 Democrats' districts."

You can NOT honestly believe that this kid had anything to do with the tea party movement or Sarah Palin????

To associate a kid like this with either party is pretty sad. He is obviously mentally disturbed and his demons go far beyond a political affiliation.

[LLT]

OKAY....I have shake my head.

Someone here at work just brought in their Garmin and showed me the EXACT same symbol as that on Sarah Palin's map. I guess we need to find all Garmin owners in areas that have shootings and blame them instead of the gunmen.

[GoSlash27]

Oh, I dunno.

"Palin's Facebook page in March posted a U.S. map with the cross-hairs of a gun scope imposed over each of the 20 Democrats' districts. 'We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list," Giffords said at the time. "The way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they've got to realize there are consequences to that action.'"

Are you suggesting that this nut was somehow influenced by Palin? That's pretty reprehensible, dude. Sick, opportunistic, and insulting. This guy is a troubled fringe nut who is radical-left. He hates Palin even more than Giffords. Show some respect. The woman is lying in intensive care.

[Akagi]

Nutbags take that stuff seriously. Normal people don't, but nutbags do. It's not her fault he's a nutbag, but it's no stretch from A to B.

[The Patriot]

You can NOT honestly believe that this kid had anything to do with the tea party movement or Sarah Palin????

To associate a kid like this with either party is pretty sad. He is obviously mentally disturbed and his demons go far beyond a political affiliation.

No, it's completely unfair to associate a sick shell of a human being like this to Republicans, just like it's unfair to associate Obama with Hitler, the greatest mass murderer who ever lived. But having had a map with cross-hairs over this poor woman must feel kind of silly right now.

Just saying. :coffee:

[LLT]

No, it's completely unfair to associate a sick shell of a human being like this to Republicans, just like it's unfair to associate Obama with Hitler, the greatest mass murderer who ever lived. But having had a map with cross-hairs over this poor woman must feel kind of silly right now. Just saying. :coffee:

I think that some of you are taking cheap shots at the expense of a pretty awful situation. Your comparison is not even intellectually accurate. If someone were to try and blame Obama for the deaths of jews...then your analysis that Palin is responsible for the shooting in Arizona would at least be comparitive.

[LLT]

I really do find it sad that people feel the need to trivialize a tragedy like this to further their own political viewpoints....and that goes for anyone on EITHER side of the aisle who want to politicize this.

As I have said from the beginning...this guy's actions cannot be tied to ANY political party...nor is it even vaguely humerous to insinuate that one party or the other might have sparked his actions.

He was a nut who shot innocent people....nothing more.

[Borski]

He hated both parties, all form of government. He wasn't influenced by Palin or anyone other then his extremist own views of the world. He saw an opportunity and took it and he should rot in hell for his actions.

[GoSlash27]

Nutbags take that stuff seriously. Normal people don't, but nutbags do. It's not her fault he's a nutbag, but it's no stretch from A to B.

Uhh... Ya it is. If you're trying to convince me that this guy would've spent enough time on Palin's website to see those "targets", let alone confuse himself into misinterpreting them as instructions, I assure you I'm not half as stupid as you assume.
This guy hated Giffords because she voted against Pelosi as minority leader. He's not a Palin fan. He is as far away from a Palin fan as it is humanly possible to get.
People died here. How'sabout showing a little respect?

[Akagi]

I really do find it sad that people feel the need to trivialize a tragedy like this to further their own political viewpoints....and that goes for anyone on EITHER side of the aisle who want to politicize this.

As I have said from the beginning...this guy's actions cannot be tied to ANY political party...nor is it even vaguely humerous to insinuate that one party or the other might have sparked his actions.

He was a nut who shot innocent people....nothing more.

I agree. My point wouldn't be to silence anyone's ideas, but to change the inflammatory way those ideas are transmitted. Everything else is for the ballot box to decide; debating them here or anywhere on the internet is pointless.

[LLT]

He hated both parties, all form of government. He wasn't influenced by Palin or anyone other then his extremist own views of the world. He saw an opportunity and took it and he should rot in hell for his actions.

This.

[Akagi]

Uhh... Ya it is. If you're trying to convince me that this guy would've spent enough time on Palin's website to see those "targets", let alone confuse himself into misinterpreting them as instructions, I assure you I'm not half as stupid as you assume.
This guy hated Giffords because she voted against Pelosi as minority leader. He's not a Palin fan. He is as far away from a Palin fan as it is humanly possible to get.
People died here. How'sabout showing a little respect?

If you hadn't linked it, I would never have seen it. So, show some respect yourself by letting it go.

[The Patriot]

I really do find it sad that people feel the need to trivialize a tragedy like this to further their own political viewpoints....and that goes for anyone on EITHER side of the aisle who want to politicize this.

As I have said from the beginning...this guy's actions cannot be tied to ANY political party...nor is it even vaguely humerous to insinuate that one party or the other might have sparked his actions.

He was a nut who shot innocent people....nothing more.


He hated both parties, all form of government. He wasn't influenced by Palin or anyone other then his extremist own views of the world. He saw an opportunity and took it and he should rot in hell for his actions.

You're right. This is a tragedy that nobody could have prevented, but people in both parties are going to react emotionally to this. And if you don't like people blaming conservative rhetoric, then you shouldn't go the opposite way and accuse liberals of trying to capitalize politically off this tragedy (I feel this thread hints toward that). There's just a lot of displaced anger right now.

[LLT]

You're right. This is a tragedy that nobody could have prevented, but people in both parties are going to react emotionally to this. And if you don't like people blaming conservative rhetoric, then you shouldn't go the opposite way and accuse liberals of trying to capitalize politically off this tragedy (I feel this thread hints toward that). There's just a lot of displaced anger right now.


No one specifically accused liberals of capitalizing off this tragedy. The original aim was at "political opportunists"...and I see nowhere in the thread where anyone specifically blamed the left but rather the media for trying to spin this story. In fact other than two posters who wanted to try and pin this on Palin and the tea party...the rest of the thread was devoted to several posters trying to get the thread back on track by saying that the gunman can NOT be affiliated with either party.

the original post

[GoSlash27]

No one specifically accused liberals of capitalizing off this tragedy. The original aim was at "political opportunists"...and I see nowhere in the thread where anyone specifically blamed the left but rather the media for trying to spin this story. In fact other than two posters who wanted to try and pin this on Palin and the tea party...the rest of the thread was devoted to several posters trying to get the thread back on track by saying that the gunman can NOT be affiliated with either party.

the original post

Let me be very clear about this: I *AM* accusing the liberals of trying to capitalize on this senseless tragedy. That's what they're attempting and we all know it.
Neither side is responsible for what has transpired here, and any attempt to blame this on any public figure or any party is pretty low IMO.

[Akagi]

Q: Why did you bring this up?

A: To get people outraged.

So you are guilty of what you charge others.

[GoSlash27]

Q: Why did you bring this up?

A: To get people outraged.

So you are guilty of what you charge others.

Bullshit. I didn't post this to assign blame for somebody's death while they were still clinging to life. If the liberals don't like being called out for this politically opportunistic behavior, they should stop fuckin' doing it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdbUwlM4bK4

[Borski]

Q: Why did you bring this up?

A: To get people outraged.

So you are guilty of what you charge others.

I see nothing that shows him blaming political parties for the attack. He showed how people where taking advantage of this and misleading others. You are being over-simplistic and not listing to the facts.

[Akagi]

I see nothing that shows him blaming political parties for the attack. He showed how people where taking advantage of this and misleading others.

And used that to perpetuate discord. If he'd have left it where it was, it would have stayed there, in its little corner.

[GoSlash27]

And used that to perpetuate discord. If he'd have left it where it was, it would have stayed there, in its little corner.

"In it's little corner"... all over the mainstream media blaming somebody who had absolutely nothing to do with it (yet again)? Is that how it works? You blame your political opponents knowing damn well they had nothing to do with it, and when we rightly throw it back in your faces *we're* the ones "perpetuating discord"? I don't think so. I'm not the guy who took us there. That was Olberman's doing.

I won't sit down and shut up because you people lack the simple humanity to respect the dead. The guy who did it was a communist Pelosi fanboi BY HIS OWN ADMISSION and if his actions can be blamed on anybody other than himself, it sure as *HELL* ain't Palin.

[Borski]

And used that to perpetuate discord. If he'd have left it where it was, it would have stayed there, in its little corner.

What little corner? It's all over the news.

I don't see why either party needs to jump on an act of violence and blame the other for causing it. Both Parties are guilty of this, this time it was the Liberals.

What it is, is a tragedy and it is disrespectful to the families that had loved ones die by reducing this to a political debate.

[GoSlash27]

What little corner? It's all over the news.

I don't see why either party needs to jump on an act of violence and blame the other for causing it. Both Parties are guilty of this, this time it was the Liberals.

What it is, is a tragedy and it is disrespectful to the families that had loved ones die by reducing this to a political debate.

Just to be clear, I do not blame the liberals for this. The guy did it on his own. But I *do* blame the liberals for the fact that this political debate ever had a reason to start. Now is not the time for this, and they should be ashamed of themselves for trying to take advantage of this in such a callous and calculating way.

[X-Terminator]

Bishop — who was an early target of the angry health care hearings in his Long Island district — told The Associated Press that while he cannot prove it, he believes that virulent political rhetoric contributed to the attack on Giffords.


"There can only be so many times that an unbalanced individual can hear that his president is a socialist and that his Congress is trying to take away his individual liberties before he takes matters into his own hands," Bishop said.


http://hosted2.ap.org/PAGRE/140fe8300e9c43bab097b794ca7594c6/Article_2011-01-09-Giffords%20Face%20to%20Face%20Democracy/id-a0bbe2614b1f4a2dadccb51c1ce0b3b0

Just sayin'...

[Borski]

Just to be clear, I do not blame the liberals for this. The guy did it on his own. But I *do* blame the liberals for the fact that this political debate ever had a reason to start. Now is not the time for this, and they should be ashamed of themselves for trying to take advantage of this in such a callous and calculating way.

I'm not blaming the Liberals for the guys actions, I agree he did it on his own. But I hear liberals staying he is one of the "teabaggers" and stuff like that and other false acustations.

[The Patriot]

:hmm:

http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss74/4chantamahan/sarahpalintargets.png?t=1294698769

[steeldawg]

:hmm:

http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss74/4chantamahan/sarahpalintargets.png?t=1294698769

Youre right that is an excuse for a shooting spree!!

[The Patriot]

Youre right that is an excuse for a shooting spree!!

Yeah, because I'm totally excusing the shooter...

It's just interesting that several months ago Gabrielle Giffords had said publicly that having a map with cross-hairs over her location with the words "We've diagnosed the problem... Help us prescribe the solution" made her feel uncomfortable. I know if my wife or a family member of mine held a public office, and some political figure posted a map like this... I would have a couple choice words for that person.

[GoSlash27]

Yeah, because I'm totally excusing the shooter...

It's just interesting that several months ago Gabrielle Giffords had said publicly that having a map with cross-hairs over her location with the words "We've diagnosed the problem... Help us prescribe the solution" made her feel uncomfortable. I know if my wife or a family member of mine held a public office, and some political figure posted a map like this... I would have a couple choice words for that person.

WTF would any of that have to do with this? Even assuming for the sake of argument that this guy had a Sarah Palin "fathead" on his bedroom wall, you think that this would've been different if she'd marked that map with puppies or daisies? No. The guy's a nutbag and no rhetoric on either side had anything to do with it. "Crazy" has no politics.

I personally think that more civility in political discourse would be a good thing. Perhaps refraining from exploiting random tragedies to smear your opponents would be a good first step?

[Borski]

:hmm:

http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss74/4chantamahan/sarahpalintargets.png?t=1294698769

http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/dlc-targeting-map.gif?w=397&h=355

both used targets, its a common term referring to elections and campaigns.

[The Patriot]

WTF would any of that have to do with this? Even assuming for the sake of argument that this guy had a Sarah Palin "fathead" on his bedroom wall, you think that this would've been different if she'd marked that map with puppies or daisies? No. The guy's a nutbag and no rhetoric on either side had anything to do with it. "Crazy" has no politics.

I personally think that more civility in political discourse would be a good thing. Perhaps refraining from exploiting random tragedies to smear your opponents would be a good first step?
You're acting as if this nut needed direct influence from Palin for a map like this to be irresponsible. It's clear he acted out of his own delirium but anyone with eyes can see that these instances (like in Pittsburgh) of already mentally unstable people acting up are a result of the heated political climate. Someone in Palin's position shouldn't be using this ambiguous language that some nut could use as an excuse to commit violence. If any other political figure had been caught with a map like this after this incident, they would have been just as scrutinized.

http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/dlc-targeting-map.gif?w=397&h=355

both used targets, its a common term referring to elections and campaigns.

"Behind enemy lines" is the kind of BS political rhetoric that has to stop, and had somebody fired an arrow at one of these candidates, you'd probably have had a bigger case.

[Godfather]

http://hosted2.ap.org/PAGRE/140fe8300e9c43bab097b794ca7594c6/Article_2011-01-09-Giffords%20Face%20to%20Face%20Democracy/id-a0bbe2614b1f4a2dadccb51c1ce0b3b0

Just sayin'...

Well, in fairness we heard for eight years that Bush was a Nazi and a war criminal, stole the election, etc.

[GBMelBlount]

Well, on a little more positive note...


Congresswoman raises 2 fingers, gives thumbs-up

TUCSON, Ariz. – Doctors treating Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords said Monday the congresswoman was responding to verbal commands by raising two fingers of her left hand and even managed to give a thumbs-up.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_med_congresswoman_brain_injury

[GoSlash27]

You're acting as if this nut needed direct influence from Palin for a map like this to be irresponsible.
No I'm not. *You're* the one doing that. I (and the rest of the world) am telling you that his actions had absolutely nothing to do with anybody's maps.

*edit* Oh, I see what you're saying. Yeah, I am acting like that. And for good reason: That's the way it is. Your argument "her map is irresponsible even though it didn't cause people like this to do anything bad because it caused this guy to do something bad" is totally self-conflicted.
More to the point, political CAMPAIGNS (martial word) have been RALLYING THE TROOPS (martial word) to TARGET (martial word) ENEMY TERRITORY (martial word) for as long as we've had democracy. *You* act like Palin is the first politician to ever put a target on a map. It ain't "irresponsible", it's normal.


anyone with eyes can see that these instances (like in Pittsburgh) of already mentally unstable people acting up are a result of the heated political climate.

No... they're "acting up" because they are INSANE. If you want to link the two together, you're gonna have to provide some sort of proof.
We could have Rachel Maddow and Ann Coulter skipping off through the daisies together with Al Sharpton and Bill O'Reilly singing Kumbaya in the background. That still ain't gonna keep people like this from climbing bell towers with their sniper rifles and killing people over their alien mind rays or precious bodily fluids or WTF ever.
And I don't know if you've noticed, but the political climate has been "heated" since long before either of us were born. If you don't like it, then don't feed it by using episodes like this to attack your political opponents before you even know what's going on. Not only does that behavior fuel the fire, but it's frankly disgusting.

[steeldawg]

How the hell can anyone in their right mind blame sarah palin, talk radio, or some dumb map for this shooting. With the violent movies music and video games we have nowadays we're supposed to believe that political rehtoric or a map on the internet with crosshairs on it drove someone to go on a shooting spree??? I know whos fault this shooting is........ready??????.........It's the fault of the guy who pulled the trigger......Oh my God!!! am I really suggesting someone be accountable for their own actions.....Let me shut up with all this crazy talk.

[Doc_Holiday]

The timing is horrid. But I find it odd that nobody from the Palin camp came out with at least an "Oops!" A genuine one. And if this gunman were Muslim and there was a Facebook page for CAIR that had a similar map with cross-hairs, we'd be outraged.

I am not saying at all, that she is responsible or that talk radio is responsible. But to not say anything except for some B.S. that they were surveyor marks is stupid.

Say something to the effect, "Out metaphor used for the battleground states were not the best choice in hindsight. I am disheartened and disgusted that anyone would think to take this literally or use it as an excuse for taking a horrible action - for that I am truly sorry."

Simple - to the point without taking responsibility for something she's not responsible for.

[GoSlash27]

The timing is horrid. But I find it odd that nobody from the Palin camp came out with at least an "Oops!" A genuine one. And if this gunman were Muslim and there was a Facebook page for CAIR that had a similar map with cross-hairs, we'd be outraged.

I am not saying at all, that she is responsible or that talk radio is responsible. But to not say anything except for some B.S. that they were surveyor marks is stupid.

Say something to the effect, "Out metaphor used for the battleground states were not the best choice in hindsight. I am disheartened and disgusted that anyone would think to take this literally or use it as an excuse for taking a horrible action - for that I am truly sorry."

Simple - to the point without taking responsibility for something she's not responsible for.

I do not agree. I'm not even a Palin fan, but I think it's wrong for her to apologize in any way for anything she's done here, since everybody agrees that her map had fuck-all to do with this. She should be on the offensive against the slimeballs who would dare try to twist this into a political attack on her while a 9 year old girl lays dead. An apology in any form gives credence to their reprehensible behavior.

[Mach1]

Your an idiot if you think this is n anyway Palins fault. Might as well blame it on Bush to while your at it.

[steeldawg]

The timing is horrid. But I find it odd that nobody from the Palin camp came out with at least an "Oops!" A genuine one. And if this gunman were Muslim and there was a Facebook page for CAIR that had a similar map with cross-hairs, we'd be outraged.

I am not saying at all, that she is responsible or that talk radio is responsible. But to not say anything except for some B.S. that they were surveyor marks is stupid.

Say something to the effect, "Out metaphor used for the battleground states were not the best choice in hindsight. I am disheartened and disgusted that anyone would think to take this literally or use it as an excuse for taking a horrible action - for that I am truly sorry."

Simple - to the point without taking responsibility for something she's not responsible for.

There is no proof that the guy that did the shooting even visited palins website or listened to talk radio. If I am wrong about this let me know but from the reports i saw this was just some nut job.

[Doc_Holiday]

Your an idiot if you think this is n anyway Palins fault. Might as well blame it on Bush to while your at it.

Not blaming her at all - but if she doesn't do something proactive, she's done for. Do something the left wouldn't expect. Throw them off their b.s. game.

[Craic]

Sure is a shame Jodie Foster is responsible for Reagan's assassination attempt. She should have been more approachable so Hinkley didn't have to take extreme measures.

[7SteelGal43]

"Politicizing the incident" ? Be sure the finger is pointing in the right direction. In the wake of this tragic shooting by a complete nutjob, whose name wasn't even known yet, the left jumped all over it. Twitter was all abuzz within minutes with people posting Palins "map" with snide comments like "mission accomplished, Sarah" and "way to go Sarah". Already on The Daily Kos, there are countless articles re-igniting the gun control issue immediately after this tragic event. Politicize much ? And speaking of blaming Sarahs map, how bout the article in The Daily Kos this past week entitled "My congressWOMAN voted against Pelosi. She is dead to me now". Yes, the article was in response to Giffords voting against Nancy Pelosi for House Minority Leader. Don't bother looking for it at The Kos site now. It's been removed in the aftermath of the shooting. But, it is archived at least one place I know of. The left did not wait to find out anything about the shooter before forming an opinion. If fact, rather than some right winger, we have come to learn he was a left wing dope smoker who listed two of his favorite books as "Mien Kampf" and "The Communist Manifesto". But mainly, he was a nutjob. That is more key than his political affiliation...period. He was actually obsessed (then upset) with Giffords.

[The Patriot]

Political rhetoric has gotten a little out of hand, is all I'm saying. Slogans like "Don't retreat, reload!" signs that say "We came unarmed this time" and a map with cross-hairs that says "We've diagnosed the problem, help us prescribe the solution". Palin did say: "When we say we need to take up arms, we're talking about our votes," :rolleyes: but these gun metaphors kind of border on intimidation in my opinion.

You can accuse me of trying to capitalize on this incident, but I think this serves as a terrifying reminder of what a crazy person with a gun is capable of. Even though I think he acted out of his own dementia, let's try to demonstrate our conviction to our political beliefs and our nonviolent opposition to the beliefs of others as clearly as possible. No more ambiguous innuendo that could mislead, from Democrats or Republicans.

[7SteelGal43]

Political rhetoric has gotten a little out of hand, is all I'm saying. Slogans like "Don't retreat, reload!" signs that say "We came unarmed this time" and a map with cross-hairs that says "We've diagnosed the problem, help us prescribe the solution". Palin did say: "When we say we need to take up arms, we're talking about our votes," :rolleyes: but these gun metaphors kind of border on intimidation in my opinion.

You can accuse me of trying to capitalize on this incident, but I think this serves as a terrifying reminder of what a crazy person with a gun is capable of. Even though I think he acted out of his own dementia, let's try to demonstrate our conviction to our political beliefs and our nonviolent opposition to the beliefs of others as clearly as possible. No more ambiguous innuendo that could mislead, from Democrats or Republicans.

Again, make sure the finger of blame is pointed in the right direction.

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/imheretokillbush.jpg
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/wp-content/images2009/hangbushringo.jpg
http://quickdailyhits.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/kill-bush-protest-sign-zombietime.jpg
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/DonaldDouglas/Americaneocon/Adam%20Schiff%20Town%20Hall/IMG_2393.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/rvrlynn/W%20Graphics/Threats/143-4351_2IMG1.jpg

[Craic]

Again, make sure the finger of blame is pointed in the right direction.
Exactly.


IMO, this is just another, "We can act this way, but you can't" rant from the left. The very things they are accusing the Republicans of doing, are the things that they did during Bush's tenor in office. Then, it was patriotism and free speech. Today, it is hate and obstructionism. Sorry, can't have it both ways.

[The Patriot]

Again, make sure the finger of blame is pointed in the right direction.



IMO, this is just another, "We can act this way, but you can't" rant from the left. The very things they are accusing the Republicans of doing, are the things that they did during Bush's tenor in office. Then, it was patriotism and free speech. Today, it is hate and obstructionism. Sorry, can't have it both ways.

I don't recall anybody in their right minds defending idiots who want to hang Bush. I'm sure you can find some people that say Bush should be hanged. I'm sure I could definitively find some people that say Obama should be hanged. Let's not let these types of people set the measure of civility in our political arena.

[GoSlash27]

Political rhetoric has gotten a little out of hand, is all I'm saying. Slogans like "Don't retreat, reload!" signs that say "We came unarmed this time" and a map with cross-hairs that says "We've diagnosed the problem, help us prescribe the solution". Palin did say: "When we say we need to take up arms, we're talking about our votes," :rolleyes: but these gun metaphors kind of border on intimidation in my opinion.

You can accuse me of trying to capitalize on this incident, but I think this serves as a terrifying reminder of what a crazy person with a gun is capable of. Even though I think he acted out of his own dementia, let's try to demonstrate our conviction to our political beliefs and our nonviolent opposition to the beliefs of others as clearly as possible. No more ambiguous innuendo that could mislead, from Democrats or Republicans.

Nobody is *MISLED*!! WTF are you talkin' about, dude?
If you were to blame Jodie Foster for Hinckley's behavior or the Beatles for Manson or Marilyn Manson for Columbine your argument would at least involve something that was involved with something. "Irresponsible"?!? Is that your new standard now? Society should avoid saying or doing anything that could possibly set off some nut somewhere even though it never has in the past?? How the Hell are we supposed to predict what crazy people think? Nobody can predict what crazy people will think. That's why we call them "CRAZY".

You're reaching. You just want to use this episode as an excuse to attack somebody you don't like, and it's beyond pathetic. People like you might not owe Palin or the TEA Party an apology, but you do owe an apology to the families of the victims. This is just plain low.

But as I said, I do agree that the political discussion should be much more civil. Not for the sake of public safety, but merely because it helps to clear the air. If you truly wish to civilize things, I'd suggest in the future *not* picking up the bleeding corpses of 9 year old girls and attempting to use them as bludgeons against your political opponents. Fer Christ's sake, man! At least come up with a coherent argument relating them to your target and give the families some privacy/ time to grieve!
/WTF is wrong with you people? Have you no decency?

[Borski]

No one should ever be allowed to use Metaphors ever again, we all have to be politically correct :jerkit:

[X-Terminator]

I don't recall anybody in their right minds defending idiots who want to hang Bush. I'm sure you can find some people that say Bush should be hanged. I'm sure I could definitively find some people that say Obama should be hanged. Let's not let these types of people set the measure of civility in our political arena.

There wasn't anyone on the left denouncing those idiots either. That is the point that some are making - some of these same people who gave a nod and wink to that rhetoric are now attempting to pin this tragedy on the right for their own political gain. It's hypocritical and, quite frankly, despicable.

[The Patriot]

Nobody is *MISLED*!! WTF are you talkin' about, dude?
If you were to blame Jodie Foster for Hinckley's behavior or the Beatles for Manson or Marilyn Manson for Columbine your argument would at least involve something that was involved with something. "Irresponsible"?!? Is that your new standard now? Society should avoid saying or doing anything that could possibly set off some nut somewhere even though it never has in the past?? How the Hell are we supposed to predict what crazy people think? Nobody can predict what crazy people will think. That's why we call them "CRAZY".

You're reaching. You just want to use this episode as an excuse to attack somebody you don't like, and it's beyond pathetic. People like you might not owe Palin or the TEA Party an apology, but you do owe an apology to the families of the victims. This is just plain low.

But as I said, I do agree that the political discussion should be much more civil. Not for the sake of public safety, but merely because it helps to clear the air. If you truly wish to civilize things, I'd suggest in the future *not* picking up the bleeding corpses of 9 year old girls and attempting to use them as bludgeons against your political opponents. Fer Christ's sake, man! At least come up with a coherent argument relating them to your target and give the families some privacy/ time to grieve!
/WTF is wrong with you people? Have you no decency?

Thank you for that fair and tasteful imagery. You have successfully pissed me off. If you're going to keep putting words in my mouth then I'm probably going to end the conversation here, but let me try to hammer in this point before you get hysterical again and go into victim mode.

Some conservatives, particularly Sarah Palin, love to talk tough. They love to insert veiled threats in their rhetoric, probably because they enjoy the narrative of the people rising up to overthrow a tyrannical government. Palin has done everything short of stroking a gun when she tells Democrats to watch out. Don't try to tell me her rhetoric hasn't been filled with revolutionary and gun related innuendo during her campaigns. Now, that's thankfully not responsible for this shooting, but I doubt Palin will use the slogan "Don't retreat, reload" the next time she pits a tea party candidate against Gifford. I bet a map with cross-hairs on it kind of feels a little foolish and tasteless now that we've been reminded of the terrible reality of gun violence.

Seriously, I thought Gifford was a danger to this country! I thought she voted for death panels! :ranger: If you're gonna tell your supporters to "take up arms" and use this harsh rhetoric, you better goddamn mean it! If you're gonna say Assange "should be hunted like Al-Qaeda leaders" you better goddamn mean it! Don't cower in victim mode when you start getting flak for the things you say.

And don't try this McCarthy/Welch exchange crap on me. You don't think I'm upset about the little girl??? I'm not the one who thinks every idiot who turns 18 should be allowed to purchase a semi-automatic weapon (the army rejected him for christsakes!). But whenever a politician mentions the word gun control, he's met with these same over-dramatic veiled threats, and someone like Palin wouldn't waste a second to jump on that crazy train. I guess it's impossible to allow respectable citizens to own guns and still keep them away from the mentally unstable.

So yes, I hope this incident gets shoved in the face of every inflammatory, gun-toting politician who's full of hot air and is polluting the political arena with their crap, be it Democrat or Republican.

[Doc_Holiday]

Thank you for that fair and tasteful imagery. You have successfully pissed me off. If you're going to keep putting words in my mouth then I'm probably going to end the conversation here, but let me try to hammer in this point before you get hysterical again and go into victim mode.

Some conservatives, particularly Sarah Palin, love to talk tough. They love to insert veiled threats in their rhetoric, probably because they enjoy the narrative of the people rising up to overthrow a tyrannical government. Palin has done everything short of stroking a gun when she tells Democrats to watch out. Don't try to tell me her rhetoric hasn't been filled with revolutionary and gun related innuendo during her campaigns. Now, that's thankfully not responsible for this shooting, but I doubt Palin will use the slogan "Don't retreat, reload" the next time she pits a tea party candidate against Gifford. I bet a map with cross-hairs on it kind of feels a little foolish and tasteless now that we've been reminded of the terrible reality of gun violence.

Seriously, I thought Gifford was a danger to this country! I thought she voted for death panels! :ranger: If you're gonna tell your supporters to "take up arms" and use this harsh rhetoric, you better goddamn mean it! If you're gonna say Assange "should be hunted like Al-Qaeda leaders" you better goddamn mean it! Don't cower in victim mode when you start getting flak for the things you say.

And don't try this McCarthy/Welch exchange crap on me. You don't think I'm upset about the little girl??? I'm not the one who thinks every idiot who turns 18 should be allowed to purchase a semi-automatic weapon (the army rejected him for christsakes!). But whenever a politician mentions the word gun control, he's met with these same over-dramatic veiled threats, and someone like Palin wouldn't waste a second to jump on that crazy train. I guess it's impossible to allow respectable citizens to own guns and still keep them away from the mentally unstable.

So yes, I hope this incident gets shoved in the face of every inflammatory, gun-toting politician who's full of hot air and is polluting the political arena with their crap, be it Democrat or Republican.

Amen. The deranged prick is being touted by both sides as being influenced by the other. That's the sick part of this - Dems claim this prick is influenced by FOX News and the Likes of Limbaugh claim it's the liberals.

We need to be impeccable with our words. Say what we mean and mean what we say. If this horrid event were the flip side of Democratic rhetoric and a Republican Congressional rep being at death's door how many of you would flip your decision? How many of you would being slamming the Democrat with the map of cross-hairs?

That's the litmus test for any one of us trying our best to be authentic and impeccable. No matter what the inflammatory words spewed over the last few years feeds to insanity.

This dink acted on his own accord regardless of any outside influence and needs to be brought to trial and if found guilty, justice needs to be served.

[GoSlash27]

Thank you for that fair and tasteful imagery. You have successfully pissed me off. If you're going to keep putting words in my mouth then I'm probably going to end the conversation here, but let me try to hammer in this point before you get hysterical again and go into victim mode.
Save yourself the trouble. "End the conversation" and STFU, 'Cuz AFAIC you should be ashamed to be in the same room with yourself.
/"Never let a perfectly good crisis go to waste", right?

[GoSlash27]

If this horrid event were the flip side of Democratic rhetoric and a Republican Congressional rep being at death's door how many of you would flip your decision? How many of you would being slamming the Democrat with the map of cross-hairs?
Excellent question. If this horrid event were "the result" in either case, you might have a point. But it wasn't and you don't. It's nothing more than a sick random event at the hands of a psychopath and this entire discussion ony exists because some hopelessly partisan fuck-heads couldn't be respectful enough to park their politics when families were in pain.

But to answer your question, if it was the Republicans trying to callously use these people as a political football, I'd be cussing them out mercilessly. Respecting the families of the dead shouldn't be a partisan issue.

[Doc_Holiday]

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F Kennedy


Henry Rollins says it best in my opinion.
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2011/01/dont-blame-sarah-palin-just-stop-paying-attention.html

[Craic]

Thank you for that fair and tasteful imagery. You have successfully pissed me off. If you're going to keep putting words in my mouth then I'm probably going to end the conversation here, but let me try to hammer in this point before you get hysterical again and go into victim mode.

Some conservatives, particularly Sarah Palin, love to talk tough. They love to insert veiled threats in their rhetoric, probably because they enjoy the narrative of the people rising up to overthrow a tyrannical government. Palin has done everything short of stroking a gun when she tells Democrats to watch out. Don't try to tell me her rhetoric hasn't been filled with revolutionary and gun related innuendo during her campaigns. Now, that's thankfully not responsible for this shooting, but I doubt Palin will use the slogan "Don't retreat, reload" the next time she pits a tea party candidate against Gifford. I bet a map with cross-hairs on it kind of feels a little foolish and tasteless now that we've been reminded of the terrible reality of gun violence.

Thank you for seeing the difference between rhetoric and a command to kill. However, I disagree with you on her maybe finding a map with crosshairs foolish or tasteless. It is VERY common in political speech to TARGET districts. Both parties do it. No target had a face in the map. Only the district. It is, in the context of politics, very appropriate. You target races. And how, BTW, is it worse than “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun, because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.” Shouldn't Obama's speech be in the "crosshairs" now?

ESPECIALLY, when it turns out that the shooter was someone that, with any kind of political leanings, would be considered far left (Mien Kampf and the Communist Manifesto). Isn't it arguable that if this guy was that able to be influenced by someone on the right, then that they are just as able to be that influenced by someone on the left?


Seriously, I thought Gifford was a danger to this country! I thought she voted for death panels! :ranger: If you're gonna tell your supporters to "take up arms" and use this harsh rhetoric, you better goddamn mean it! If you're gonna say Assange "should be hunted like Al-Qaeda leaders" you better goddamn mean it! Don't cower in victim mode when you start getting flak for the things you say.
Like, "Seniors are going to have to start eating dogfood if this passes"

OBAMA: Now, if there was not collateral damage,(so this is a war?) if this was just a matter of my politics or being able to persuade the American people to my side, then I would just stick to my guns because the fact of the matter is the American people already agree with me. There are polls showing right now that the American people for the most part think it's a bad idea to provide tax cuts to the wealthy.


Or how about this:

(WARNING, NSFW LANGUAGE)

http://www.redstate.com/aglanon/files/2011/01/markos-taliban.png (http://www.redstate.com/aglanon/files/2011/01/markos-taliban.png)

(This- is the founder of DailyKos)


And I guess, this is wrong too then? (each red target is a "Targeted Republican")
http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DCCC-target-map.jpg (http://www.dccc.org/content/recovery)


http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DCCC-targeted-republican.jpghttp://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DCCC-map-legend.jpg

All of which come from teh Democrat Congressional Campaign Office.

Again, as others have asked, why is Palin's so dangerous, and this one not, when this one was done by someone closer to the political leaning of the shooter (though in no way associated).

BTW, they have removed it from their site, deleted the entire site itself (it was a spinoff). However, here is the Press release on it: http://dccc.org/blog/entry/dccc_announces_12_house_republicans_targeted_in_ma jor_grassroots_campaign/




And don't try this McCarthy/Welch exchange crap on me. You don't think I'm upset about the little girl??? I'm not the one who thinks every idiot who turns 18 should be allowed to purchase a semi-automatic weapon (the army rejected him for christsakes!). But whenever a politician mentions the word gun control, he's met with these same over-dramatic veiled threats, and someone like Palin wouldn't waste a second to jump on that crazy train. I guess it's impossible to allow respectable citizens to own guns and still keep them away from the mentally unstable.
Simply put, to mention gun control at a time like this is politicizing a tragedy (not you, politicians). Why? Because every state has laws which deny this person from owning a gun. He was mentally unfit. The issue is not laws, but the ability to enforce them. More laws won't solve the problem.


So yes, I hope this incident gets shoved in the face of every inflammatory, gun-toting politician who's full of hot air and is polluting the political arena with their crap, be it Democrat or Republican.

And those non-gun toting politicians who use the same language-- LIke the entire Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee?
Like Obama?

If you truly believe that, then good. We are in agreement. Now, would you also agree that we need to stop sound bite politics- like "The right gave 98% of the middle class a tax hike" (said within the last month),

[Mach1]

Save yourself the trouble. "End the conversation" and STFU, 'Cuz AFAIC you should be ashamed to be in the same room with yourself.
/"Never let a perfectly good crisis go to waste", right?

I'm sure The Cheatriot has already sent in his blood money.


Bernie Sanders Uses Tucson in Fundraising Pitch
January 11, 2011 4:09 P.M.
By Daniel Foster

Stephen Hayes at The Weekly Standard points to a fundraising letter sent out by Sen. Bernie Sanders, Democratic Socialist of Vermont, that uses the Tucson shootings in a pitch for political contributions to help fight off ”the Republican Party, big money corporate interests and right-wing organizations.”

What should be understood is that the violence, and threats of violence against Democrats in Arizona, was not limited to Gabrielle Giffords. Raul Grijalva, an old friend of mine and one of the most progressive members in the House, was forced to close his district office this summer when someone shot a bullet through his office window. Another Democratic elected official in Arizona, recently defeated Congressman Harry Mitchell, suspended town meetings in his district because of the threatening phone calls that he received (Mitchell was also in the cross-hairs on the Palin map). And Judge John Roll, who was shot to death at the Giffords event, had received numerous threatening calls and death threats in 2009.



http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256908/bernie-sanders-uses-tucson-fundraising-pitch-daniel-foster

[The Patriot]

Thank you for seeing the difference between rhetoric and a command to kill. However, I disagree with you on her maybe finding a map with crosshairs foolish or tasteless. It is VERY common in political speech to TARGET districts. Both parties do it. No target had a face in the map. Only the district. It is, in the context of politics, very appropriate. You target races. And how, BTW, is it worse than “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun, because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.” Shouldn't Obama's speech be in the "crosshairs" now?

ESPECIALLY, when it turns out that the shooter was someone that, with any kind of political leanings, would be considered far left (Mien Kampf and the Communist Manifesto). Isn't it arguable that if this guy was that able to be influenced by someone on the right, then that they are just as able to be that influenced by someone on the left?

Like, "Seniors are going to have to start eating dogfood if this passes"

OBAMA: Now, if there was not collateral damage,(so this is a war?) if this was just a matter of my politics or being able to persuade the American people to my side, then I would just stick to my guns because the fact of the matter is the American people already agree with me. There are polls showing right now that the American people for the most part think it's a bad idea to provide tax cuts to the wealthy.


Or how about this:

(WARNING, NSFW LANGUAGE)

(This- is the founder of DailyKos)


And I guess, this is wrong too then? (each red target is a "Targeted Republican"

All of which come from teh Democrat Congressional Campaign Office.

Again, as others have asked, why is Palin's so dangerous, and this one not, when this one was done by someone closer to the political leaning of the shooter (though in no way associated).

BTW, they have removed it from their site, deleted the entire site itself (it was a spinoff). However, here is the Press release on it: http://dccc.org/blog/entry/dccc_announces_12_house_republicans_targeted_in_ma jor_grassroots_campaign/




Simply put, to mention gun control at a time like this is politicizing a tragedy (not you, politicians). Why? Because every state has laws which deny this person from owning a gun. He was mentally unfit. The issue is not laws, but the ability to enforce them. More laws won't solve the problem.



And those non-gun toting politicians who use the same language-- LIke the entire Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee?
Like Obama?

If you truly believe that, then good. We are in agreement. Now, would you also agree that we need to stop sound bite politics- like "The right gave 98% of the middle class a tax hike" (said within the last month),

Okay, you wrote a lot so let me try to respond to it all.

I'll admit I was mistaken a few days ago. I heard the local sheriff's speech about the political rhetoric in this country being out of control, so I assumed this was a political killing. Now it's apparent that the sheriff gave people a false impression and the killer is just as crazy as they come - not even right wing at all (as you said).

That being said, I think Sarah Palin's map is catching flak because of the specific use of cross-hairs. Other politicians have used maps with targets, but a red circular target hasn't really spelled "kill shot" since probably the middle ages. It's come to symbolize an objective, while cross-hairs have a more hostile meaning. I don't think Palin would be getting this kind of flak if she had used arrow targets instead, it's probably a decision she didn't even make herself, but it's still an example of gun innuendo getting you into trouble.

I don't know why Obama said "If they bring a knife, we bring a gun." I know that would make me feel uncomfortable if I was at that speech. But yeah, that type of crap needs to stop. And if one of his political opponents were shot or stabbed in wake of that, he would probably be receiving just as much scrutiny. Like I said, I'm not trying to pick favorites.

Bringing up gun control isn't politicizing the event. After 9/11 we reexamined airport security. It's natural to want to find ways to prevent these things from happening even if pure misfortune is to blame. You're right, more laws might not be the answer to keeping guns away from lunatics, but it's important to determine how this killer obtained a weapon and if any of the laws we have in place could have prevented that.

Is a gun shop owner allowed to use common sense when I guy like this walks into his store?
http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01119/webarizona-shoo_1119241cl-3.jpg
Would we really be infringing on your 2nd Amendment rights if your doctor just had to verify that you were sane before you got your gun license? And if precautions like this already exist, why did they fail in this instance? I know we can't stop every person with evil intentions, but these are questions I'd really like answered.

[GoSlash27]

Bringing up gun control isn't politicizing the event. After 9/11 we reexamined airport security. It's natural to want to find ways to prevent these things from happening even if pure misfortune is to blame. You're right, more laws might not be the answer to keeping guns away from lunatics, but it's important to determine how this killer obtained a weapon and if any of the laws we have in place could have prevented that.

Is a gun shop owner allowed to use common sense when I guy like this walks into his store?

Would we really be infringing on your 2nd Amendment rights if your doctor just had to verify that you were sane before you got your gun license? And if precautions like this already exist, why did they fail in this instance? I know we can't stop every person with evil intentions, but these are questions I'd really like answered.

Unlike all the tripe about "political rhetoric", this subject is actually germane to the event. We always have this discussion in the wake of mass-shootings and we no doubt will again... *After* the funerals and after the investigation. The only question I can answer with 100% certainty right now is this: Gun shop owners absolutely have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. I, too, want to know why this one didn't.

[7SteelGal43]

I don't recall anybody in their right minds defending idiots who want to hang Bush. I'm sure you can find some people that say Bush should be hanged. I'm sure I could definitively find some people that say Obama should be hanged. Let's not let these types of people set the measure of civility in our political arena.


Patriot, I never said you were defending them. I was only pointing out the blatant un-checked hypocrisy. Like saying the rhetoric must be toned down but only citing something Palin said or a map she published or a sign seen at a tea party rally. The left talks about the hateful rhetoric coming from the right as if we haven't seen 10 times worse coming from the left, and for a helluva lot longer.

[LLT]

Lets all make sure that we keep this conversation civil.

My two cents on this is that there are folks on bith side of the aisle who are being very hypocritical. The blame falls on this mentally unstable idiot...ALONE.

Politicians who want to point a finger at Palin...should reconsider being in bed with the Hollywood left who glorify violence in their films.

Radio hosts who blame Pelosi should reconsider the thought process that equates the right to bear arms with the right to forego a background check.

[Craic]

Is a gun shop owner allowed to use common sense when I guy like this walks into his store?
http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01119/webarizona-shoo_1119241cl-3.jpg
Would we really be infringing on your 2nd Amendment rights if your doctor just had to verify that you were sane before you got your gun license? And if precautions like this already exist, why did they fail in this instance? I know we can't stop every person with evil intentions, but these are questions I'd really like answered.

I disagree with your response in places, but it was thought out and civil-- Thank you.

Let me just focus on your last point quoted above.

I am going to rephrase your question, and then want to know your answer--

Is it wrong for a white gun store owner to use common sense when a guy like this walks into the store, and not sell him a gun?

http://media.tbo.com/photos/trib/2008/june/061808ascott.jpg

I think he would be charged with a violation of the civil rights code, to simply refuse to sell this man a gun because of the way he looked.

[The Patriot]

Patriot, I never said you were defending them. I was only pointing out the blatant un-checked hypocrisy. Like saying the rhetoric must be toned down but only citing something Palin said or a map she published or a sign seen at a tea party rally. The left talks about the hateful rhetoric coming from the right as if we haven't seen 10 times worse coming from the left, and for a helluva lot longer.

You're right. It's just easier for us to focus on the stuff that the other side says and fail to recognize the same stuff coming from our side.

[steeldawg]

I disagree with your response in places, but it was thought out and civil-- Thank you.

Let me just focus on your last point quoted above.

I am going to rephrase your question, and then want to know your answer--

Is it wrong for a white gun store owner to use common sense when a guy like this walks into the store, and not sell him a gun?

http://media.tbo.com/photos/trib/2008/june/061808ascott.jpg

I think he would be charged with a violation of the civil rights code, to simply refuse to sell this man a gun because of the way he looked.

I think he means that if you are to own a gun you should have to be cleared by a doctor to do so. However if someone wants to kill someone else i think they will find a way wether they can legally own a gun or not.

[Craic]

I think he means that if you are to own a gun you should have to be cleared by a doctor to do so. However if someone wants to kill someone else i think they will find a way wether they can legally own a gun or not.

That is the second point, his first, was based on observations of the guy. My counterpoint, was that it actually violates the law to make decisions on whether you serve someone in a store based on looks.

On the second point, yes, I have a problem with that as well. It turns the idea of rights on their head. You can ONLY use a right when you prove yourself mentally fit. So, should we subject all voters to mental tests before they vote? Should we subject every person to a mental health examine before they get to exercise free speech, or the right to assemble? This goes back to the foundational concept that a right may only be taken away by the govt. when there is due process that ends with evidence enabling a right to be removed a person.

What is being suggested, is that the govt. is the gatekeeper of rights, only allowing a right to be doled out when they feel comfortable with a person having that right. That means, those who the govt. thinks should have rights, get them, those who they don't think should have rights, don't.

No, I am not comfortable with that at all.


Due process should and does include when a person HAS BEEN diagnosed with a mental illness, they no longer are able to buy a gun. I have no problem with that. Furthermore, I would rather remove the waiting period, have an instantaneous national background check system (which DUMPS the search if it comes up negative), and make handgun classes mandatory for anyone who owns a gun. Heck, the NRA would gladly work hand in hand with the govt. providing the classes and trainers- and trust me, they would do a better job teaching, and creating a safer environment for guns than the govt. in the first place. Because THEY are the ones who will be out in the shooting ranges with people. THEY are the ones that will take their own lives in their hands if they pass some idiot on gun safety that really doesn't know how to use a gun.

[stillers4me]

So, should we subject all voters to mental tests before they vote?


I would have no problem with that. :heh:

[HometownGal]

So, should we subject all voters to mental tests before they vote?

No . . . not everyone. Just those who put Obaaaaama into office and subjected the rest of us to his idiocy.

[Doc_Holiday]

So, should we subject all voters to mental tests before they vote?

Thankfully this violates federal law. And to jokingly claim we should only test anyone who voted for a guy we don't like is just stupid.

[Borski]

Thankfully this violates federal law. And to jokingly claim we should only test anyone who voted for a guy we don't like is just stupid.

Relax

[GoSlash27]

I disagree with your response in places, but it was thought out and civil-- Thank you.

Let me just focus on your last point quoted above.

I am going to rephrase your question, and then want to know your answer--

Is it wrong for a white gun store owner to use common sense when a guy like this walks into the store, and not sell him a gun?

http://media.tbo.com/photos/trib/2008/june/061808ascott.jpg

I think he would be charged with a violation of the civil rights code, to simply refuse to sell this man a gun because of the way he looked.

The standard when an enumerated right is involved is "strict judicial scrutiny". Adjucated mental incompetence falls under that, but requiring a mental health evaluation? That can't legally happen.
The right to keep and bear arms is a Constitutionally protected right, not a privilege. IMO we need to be looking at why this guy fell through the cracks. The cops visited his house and he was kicked out of school 'cuz he was nuts.
Literally everybody who knew him knew that he was as crazy as a bucket fulla spiders.
Why wasn't he in the NICS database? This is why we have the Brady check in place.

[The Patriot]

I disagree with your response in places, but it was thought out and civil-- Thank you.

Let me just focus on your last point quoted above.

I am going to rephrase your question, and then want to know your answer--

Is it wrong for a white gun store owner to use common sense when a guy like this walks into the store, and not sell him a gun?

I think he would be charged with a violation of the civil rights code, to simply refuse to sell this man a gun because of the way he looked.

Yeah, I understand how that could cause some problems. You can't refuse to sell because of somebody's race or how they dress, but this guy was known to mumble nonsense constantly, and right now Marshals are reporting that he sits in his cell silently for hours staring at the wall smirking, I kid you not.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/12/loughner-s-smirk-behind-bars.html

Now, he might have not been that obvious on the day he bought the gun, but gun shop owners should be obligated somehow to call authorities if they're suspicious of somebody's sanity. You can't prevent a sane person from buying a gun and doing something evil, but you can at least try to spot somebody who is mentally unstable.


That is the second point, his first, was based on observations of the guy. My counterpoint, was that it actually violates the law to make decisions on whether you serve someone in a store based on looks.

On the second point, yes, I have a problem with that as well. It turns the idea of rights on their head. You can ONLY use a right when you prove yourself mentally fit. So, should we subject all voters to mental tests before they vote? Should we subject every person to a mental health examine before they get to exercise free speech, or the right to assemble? This goes back to the foundational concept that a right may only be taken away by the govt. when there is due process that ends with evidence enabling a right to be removed a person.

What is being suggested, is that the govt. is the gatekeeper of rights, only allowing a right to be doled out when they feel comfortable with a person having that right. That means, those who the govt. thinks should have rights, get them, those who they don't think should have rights, don't.

No, I am not comfortable with that at all.


Due process should and does include when a person HAS BEEN diagnosed with a mental illness, they no longer are able to buy a gun. I have no problem with that. Furthermore, I would rather remove the waiting period, have an instantaneous national background check system (which DUMPS the search if it comes up negative), and make handgun classes mandatory for anyone who owns a gun. Heck, the NRA would gladly work hand in hand with the govt. providing the classes and trainers- and trust me, they would do a better job teaching, and creating a safer environment for guns than the govt. in the first place. Because THEY are the ones who will be out in the shooting ranges with people. THEY are the ones that will take their own lives in their hands if they pass some idiot on gun safety that really doesn't know how to use a gun.

I'm not suggesting you need to take an IQ test, but your personal doctor is a reliable source and somebody you have probably known for a while and trust. A quick phone call to check for mental illness could easily clear you. Like I said, if you're sane and you want to do something sinister, there is nothing a doctor can do. That's just the reality of the world we live in. But if a doctor suspects that a patient with a mental illness hasn't been taking his or her medicine, he's legally obligated to inform somebody if that person has a history of crime/disorder. The legal obligation applies if a patient indicates that they might be suicidal.

All I'm saying is a doctor could easily verify whether or not you are sane.

[GoSlash27]

Lets all make sure that we keep this conversation civil.

My two cents on this is that there are folks on bith side of the aisle who are being very hypocritical. The blame falls on this mentally unstable idiot...ALONE.

Politicians who want to point a finger at Palin...should reconsider being in bed with the Hollywood left who glorify violence in their films.

Radio hosts who blame Pelosi should reconsider the thought process that equates the right to bear arms with the right to forego a background check.

LLT,
This conversation lost any semblance of civility when one side attempted to capitalize on mass-murder to score cheap political points. That was about 15 minutes after it happened.
That's not a left vs. right thing; but simply objective fact.
All I ask is that everybody keep it firmly in mind that there are real people involved here who have lost something that can never be replaced.
This conversation is something that needs to happen and maybe we can pull something positive out of this tragedy, but we *NEED* to park the politics for that to happen.

So...
No map on either side had anything to do with this. It's not Palin's fault. It's not Moulitsas' fault. It's not the level of rhetoric. It's about a mentally unstable individual who did something that should never have happened. Let's discuss that.

[Doc_Holiday]

I was stunned when Palin used the "Blood Libel" comment. Of all the phrases to use, her ghost writer wrote that and she said it - What the Deuce?!? How in this day and age would anyone use that term and not know its meaning.

Addressing your point, there's bogus detail that it was a known fact the gunman was nuts. He wasn't yet and hasn't still, at least not legally speaking. And that the Sheriff had him in custody which is an out right lie.

A Fish & Game officer pulled him over for blasting through a red light prior to the event didn't suspect anything odd and let him go. And the note left was not known prior to the attack - another lie.

We're being fed fuel of utter crap because it feeds our fears. Yes there are reports that he did some freaky things in school and that would describe half of my fraternity.

But we can't just brush aside that someone who may indeed be unstable was not influenced by outside issues if that proves to be the case. I mean that's how we got to find Manson guilty. Remember, he didn't murder anyone - legally known - but we found him guilty anyway.

Don't deny that the fuel of "If ballots don't work, bullets will" or "Don't retreat, reload" are just benign comments. Talk radio is pushing this kid as the poster child for the Liberal Agenda as we speak.

Read Rollins' article on this. He spells it out beautifully and I guarantee you he's no Democratic.

[The Patriot]

LLT,
This conversation lost any semblance of civility when one side attempted to capitalize on mass-murder to score cheap political points. That was about 15 minutes after it happened.
That's not a left vs. right thing; but simply objective fact.
All I ask is that everybody keep it firmly in mind that there are real people involved here who have lost something that can never be replaced.
This conversation is something that needs to happen and maybe we can pull something positive out of this tragedy, but we *NEED* to park the politics for that to happen.

So...
No map on either side had anything to do with this. It's not Palin's fault. It's not Moulitsas' fault. It's not the level of rhetoric. It's about a mentally unstable individual who did something that should never have happened. Let's discuss that.

Why don't you save those crocodile tears. The conversation took a downturn when you started spouting that people in this thread who are upset with the gun rhetoric don't care about the deceased. I never accused Palin or her rhetoric of being accessory to this crime. You seem to have confused some people on TV who are looking to politically capitalize off this event with anybody on this forum who disagrees with you about the gun rhetoric.

You're the one who is using this event as a shield from the criticism some people have of the distastefulness of some of today's political gun rhetoric. Now, 7SteelGal pointed out that some inappropriate rhetoric was ignored when it was coming from the left during the Bush Administration, Preacher pointed out that other politicians have used target maps: that's civil discussion. You just assumed that by being upset with Palin's map, I was blaming her for the actions of this killer. This map upsets me. This map upset me 3 months ago. Rightly or wrongly, you should be able to deal with other people's opinions without having to demonize them.

I don't like to get this personal in political discussions, but I'm not gonna let somebody accuse me of flinging the death of a 9 year-old around, when clearly I'm not. So next time know who you're talking to before you take the moral high ground and tell someone to STFU.

[GoSlash27]

You're acting as if this nut needed direct influence from Palin for a map like this to be irresponsible. It's clear he acted out of his own delirium but anyone with eyes can see that these instances (like in Pittsburgh) of already mentally unstable people acting up are a result of the heated political climate. Someone in Palin's position shouldn't be using this ambiguous language that some nut could use as an excuse to commit violence.
^ Those were your words. "Crocodile tears"? You can rest assured that I am truly and sincerely pissed off over this.

[venom]

Souvenir 'Together We Thrive' Logo T-Shirts Placed on Chairs at "Memorial"

Is it a memorial or an Obama rally? Last night , souvenir t-shirts emblazoned with the logo for the 'Together We Thrive' gathering at the University of Arizona were placed on chairs at the arena ahead of the memorial.

Liberalism, using the dead for political gain

http://images.craigslist.org/3m23p13le5V45T65X2b1c943523db767a1fd3.jpg

[Dino 6 Rings]

I've been avoiding politics for a while now...started the make fun of Obama and Democrat thread way back in 08 on the other site...but lately, I've just been sitting back...chilling on it.

what is clear...and I mean completely clear, is that the Talking Heads in the media no longer report the news and are actually trying to, and successfully creating news, and taking real news stories and getting them to fit into personal political idealogical boxes that they can then spoon feed to their viewers. Its gotten to the point, where it is almost impossible to find, just the news, on a national level.

My local yocal news guy actually reports the news. "Man robs bank, cops searching" "child missing, call if you see them" "car accident on 540, find alternative route" "donations pour in for local food banks"...

on a national level its "man goes crazy shoots up Discovery building...who's to blame!" "guy flies plane into IRS Building, was he in the Tea Party! (no, actually he wasn't)" "oil spill! Big Oil under Bush caused this!" um...ok...but he's been out of office for over 18 months? "Still Bush!" or from the other side "Obama plays golf while people die in the gulf!"

its no longer Reporting. Its all agenda driven at this point at the national Level. It might be time to just start a news station, 100% non-political, and just report news. "Asteroid crashes into Australia, 3 kangaroos dead, kryptonite found" "Pilot saves lives of passengers landing plane safely into the Ocean after a terrorist tries to take it over and fails" Stuff like that. No agenda, just the news.

No Talking Points, No Worst Person Ever, No Ex Politicians brought in to be "experts" on subjects.

That's all I'm saying...this entire thing is just out of hand. And it isn't the Politicians I blame as much as I do the Media, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS and even FOX has its bad moments. But usually Fox is busy defending itself from the other 4...which is also insane in itself.

[HometownGal]

Souvenir 'Together We Thrive' Logo T-Shirts Placed on Chairs at "Memorial"

Is it a memorial or an Obama rally? Last night , souvenir t-shirts emblazoned with the logo for the 'Together We Thrive' gathering at the University of Arizona were placed on chairs at the arena ahead of the memorial.

Liberalism, using the dead for political gain

http://images.craigslist.org/3m23p13le5V45T65X2b1c943523db767a1fd3.jpg

Actually, V, I watched a portion of that Memorial Service and Obaaaaaaaamie had an excellent speech prepared and I thought he came across as extremely sincere. Several times they showed his wife wiping tears from her eyes and I believe that was genuine too. As much as I don't like either of them, they were right there mourning those tragic losses as much as everyone else who attended and the entire nation. I cried like a baby when Obaaaama was talking about the elderly gentleman who died when he dove on his wife to protect her from the gunfire, as well as that poor little 9 year old girl. :Cry:

While our nation may be politically divided, when a tragedy like this strikes, we all become one nation in mourning.

[fansince'76]

Actually, V, I watched a portion of that Memorial Service and Obaaaaaaaamie had an excellent speech prepared and I thought he came across as extremely sincere. Several times they showed his wife wiping tears from her eyes and I believe that was genuine too. As much as I don't like either of them, they were right there mourning those tragic losses as much as everyone else who attended and the entire nation. I cried like a baby when Obaaaama was talking about the elderly gentleman who died when he dove on his wife to protect her from the gunfire, as well as that poor little 9 year old girl. :Cry:

While our nation may be politically divided, when a tragedy like this strikes, we all become one nation in mourning.

Slightly off-topic - is it just me, or has Obama's hair gotten REALLY grey in the last 2 years?

[Just George]

Slightly off-topic - is it just me, or has Obama's hair gotten REALLY grey in the last 2 years?

It is well documented, being President of the United States will make your hair turn gray practically overnight. More accurately, it took President George W. Bush 8 years to achieve his grand graydom. President Clinton also turned the way of the gray late in his second term. Flash forward to our current President, Obama (http://thecount.com/2010/10/03/presidential-curse-of-gray-hair-strikes-obama-early/#), he has gone gray goose in only a year and a half.

http://thecount.com/2010/10/03/presidential-curse-of-gray-hair-strikes-obama-early/

[The Patriot]

It is well documented, being President of the United States will make your hair turn gray practically overnight. More accurately, it took President George W. Bush 8 years to achieve his grand graydom. President Clinton also turned the way of the gray late in his second term. Flash forward to our current President, Obama (http://thecount.com/2010/10/03/presidential-curse-of-gray-hair-strikes-obama-early/#), he has gone gray goose in only a year and a half.

http://thecount.com/2010/10/03/presidential-curse-of-gray-hair-strikes-obama-early/

He needs "Just for Men: Touch of Gray" :chuckle:

His hair says experience! . . . . . While his Hair says energy!
http://ehaust.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/obama-gray-hair.jpg

[zulater]

He needs "Just for Men: Touch of Gray" :chuckle:

His hair says experience! . . . . . While his Hair says energy!
http://ehaust.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/obama-gray-hair.jpg

Yeah it's amazing how much that job ages a man.

[Borski]

Actually, V, I watched a portion of that Memorial Service and Obaaaaaaaamie had an excellent speech prepared and I thought he came across as extremely sincere. Several times they showed his wife wiping tears from her eyes and I believe that was genuine too. As much as I don't like either of them, they were right there mourning those tragic losses as much as everyone else who attended and the entire nation. I cried like a baby when Obaaaama was talking about the elderly gentleman who died when he dove on his wife to protect her from the gunfire, as well as that poor little 9 year old girl. :Cry:

While our nation may be politically divided, when a tragedy like this strikes, we all become one nation in mourning.

I agree, while I am not an Obama Fan that is one of the best heartfelt speeches I have heard from a president in my lifetime.

[zulater]

Actually, V, I watched a portion of that Memorial Service and Obaaaaaaaamie had an excellent speech prepared and I thought he came across as extremely sincere. Several times they showed his wife wiping tears from her eyes and I believe that was genuine too. As much as I don't like either of them, they were right there mourning those tragic losses as much as everyone else who attended and the entire nation. I cried like a baby when Obaaaama was talking about the elderly gentleman who died when he dove on his wife to protect her from the gunfire, as well as that poor little 9 year old girl. :Cry:

While our nation may be politically divided, when a tragedy like this strikes, we all become one nation in mourning.

Excellent post!

[HometownGal]

Slightly off-topic - is it just me, or has Obama's hair gotten REALLY grey in the last 2 years?

It HAS. If you were married to his wife, your hair would be grey too. :horror: :heh:

I noticed that by the end of his first term, Bush's hair got pretty grey too. :noidea:

[Craic]

Yeah, I understand how that could cause some problems. You can't refuse to sell because of somebody's race or how they dress, but this guy was known to mumble nonsense constantly, and right now Marshals are reporting that he sits in his cell silently for hours staring at the wall smirking, I kid you not.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/12/loughner-s-smirk-behind-bars.html

Now, he might have not been that obvious on the day he bought the gun, but gun shop owners should be obligated somehow to call authorities if they're suspicious of somebody's sanity. You can't prevent a sane person from buying a gun and doing something evil, but you can at least try to spot somebody who is mentally unstable.



I'm not suggesting you need to take an IQ test, but your personal doctor is a reliable source and somebody you have probably known for a while and trust. A quick phone call to check for mental illness could easily clear you. Like I said, if you're sane and you want to do something sinister, there is nothing a doctor can do. That's just the reality of the world we live in. But if a doctor suspects that a patient with a mental illness hasn't been taking his or her medicine, he's legally obligated to inform somebody if that person has a history of crime/disorder. The legal obligation applies if a patient indicates that they might be suicidal.

All I'm saying is a doctor could easily verify whether or not you are sane.
And that goes back to my last post. The foundational understanding of this nation is that rights are not bestowed by the govt. They are bestowed by a creator, whomever that may be (yes, even the spaghetti monster) according to the dec. of indep. Based on that precept, the constitution establishes what rights may be taken away by due process, and that process to take them away.

What you are suggesting, is a reversal of that foundational understanding of human rights in our nation. That a person is bestowed a right only when they pass a test. I categorically reject that because it is a setup for bigotry of all kinds.

On top of that, think about how it will practically play out. 1. Every doctor who says "yes", he may own a gun, will now be subjected to a lawsuit when that gun is used to kill someone, since killing a person (not in self defense) can be considered a psychological problem. 2. Every doctor who is afraid of such lawsuits, or every doctor who is against gun ownership, now UNEQUIVOCALLY has the right to deny a constitutionally guaranteed right to a fellow citizen, simply based on his position. 3. Protecting doctors from lawsuits by making them exempt, will only empower those who are against gun ownership to deny the right to people. 4. There will arise a different class of doctors who are pro-gun ownership. Anyone and everyone can go to that doctor once, then turn in THAT doc's name for a references. 5. If you put time limitations on it, then what happens when your doctor of 30 years dies? Are you now unable to own a gun until you have established a record with a new doctor?

Also, think how this law would be absolutely classist. The middle and upper classes will still be able to own guns. The lower class however, will now find it much more difficult, especially the poorer one is. Why? Because they have to spend MORE money to be seen by a doctor and establish a relationship before they can buy one. The concept of "My Doctor" isn't as prevalent as it used to be. Docs move, people move, insurances change. Furthermore, those who are too poor to have insurance must go to county health. You never are guaranteed the same doctor. So what happens? Will those who cannot see the same doctor never be able to own a gun? Should the inability to buy health insurance preclude your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to own a gun?

No, I do not agree at all with that law. Instead, what we have here is a failure of officials to use laws already in place to stop a crime. Furthermore, that same issue is what caused the Virginia Tech shootings. The judged declared Seung Hui Cho mentally unstable. However, his name was not entered in the database for national background checks.

No, the problem isn't laws. ONce again, it is the inefficiency of govt.

[GoSlash27]

Actually, V, I watched a portion of that Memorial Service and Obaaaaaaaamie had an excellent speech prepared and I thought he came across as extremely sincere. Several times they showed his wife wiping tears from her eyes and I believe that was genuine too. As much as I don't like either of them, they were right there mourning those tragic losses as much as everyone else who attended and the entire nation. I cried like a baby when Obaaaama was talking about the elderly gentleman who died when he dove on his wife to protect her from the gunfire, as well as that poor little 9 year old girl. :Cry:

While our nation may be politically divided, when a tragedy like this strikes, we all become one nation in mourning.

I agree. I think Obama gave an excellent speech and I believe he truly meant what he said. But that audience!! All the cheering and enthusiasm was completely wrong for the occasion. It should've been much more somber and respectful. That made it weird, and I think the President felt it too.

[Doc_Holiday]

I agree. I think Obama gave an excellent speech and I believe he truly meant what he said. But that audience!! All the cheering and enthusiasm was completely wrong for the occasion. It should've been much more somber and respectful. That made it weird, and I think the President felt it too.

I hated the audience; this wasn't a G-D Pep Rally. I was never sure of the President when he was voted in; but we'll just have to wait to see if he pulls the economy around.

[venom]

On the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, deposed Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-Mars), called the deliberate and premeditated killing of six people – the Tucson massacre – an “accident.” Specifically, Madame said, quote:

“This resolution is a fitting tribute. It is a great resolution. Please, read it again and again. Carry those names in your heart. Remember, each of these people because, again, a tragic accident took lives, wounded people in the expression of ideas.”

Unreal

[Godfather]

I agree. I think Obama gave an excellent speech and I believe he truly meant what he said. But that audience!! All the cheering and enthusiasm was completely wrong for the occasion. It should've been much more somber and respectful. That made it weird, and I think the President felt it too.

Agree. I saw a transcript of O's speech and there was nothing wrong with anything he said.

But I don't like what I heard about the crowd's behavior. It reflects poorly on their parents for not teaching them what's appropriate and inappropriate.

[Godfather]

Yeah it's amazing how much that job ages a man.

Almost like dog years.

That's one reason Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann opposed Hillary--they said they didn't want to watch a woman age in the Oval Office.

[The Patriot]

Agree. I saw a transcript of O's speech and there was nothing wrong with anything he said.

But I don't like what I heard about the crowd's behavior. It reflects poorly on their parents for not teaching them what's appropriate and inappropriate.

I know! That really irked me. Were those college kids or something?

[X-Terminator]

I know! That really irked me. Were those college kids or something?

Most of them were as it as held at the University of Arizona...which tells you all you need to know about their maturity level. I should know - I work for a major university here in Pittsburgh (not Pitt).

[Craic]

Most of them were as it as held at the University of Arizona...which tells you all you need to know about their maturity level. I should know - I work for a major university here in Pittsburgh (not Pitt).

Any chance you can get me a job as a professor of religion/ANE culture? That way, I can go watch the steelers games as well. :chuckle:

[GoSlash27]

I know! That really irked me. Were those college kids or something?

I'm really inclined to give the administration a pass on that one. They have people who specialize in doing rallies, and I think they just reverted to type under stress.
But the students should really have known better. The family of the victims were right there in the audience, and I think Obama truly wanted it to be about them.
If it was my daughter who had been murdered, I don't think I could've sat through that.

[Craic]

I'm really inclined to give the administration a pass on that one. They have people who specialize in doing rallies, and I think they just reverted to type under stress.
But the students should really have known better. The family of the victims were right there in the audience, and I think Obama truly wanted it to be about them.
If it was my daughter who had been murdered, I don't think I could've sat through that.

You know, that is a very good point. I didn't watch the speech, nor have I read it. However, I do not carry any animus towards our president, and am glad to hear people stating that this was a very straight forward speech.

[Doc_Holiday]

I admired him for it; far and few things to tip my hat in his direction.

[Craic]

I admired him for it; far and few things to tip my hat in his direction.

That too, would be my sentiments.

I admired him for allowing the US Navy Seals to take care of the Pirates the way they should be taken care of-- I admired him for reversing course on Iraq, which he did (for a time-until, If I remember right, the military said it was time), and I admired him for another stand he took (late now, can't remember), but he basically took a Reaganesque stand against a country on something which I admired him for.

Can't really say much else in his two years of "leadership" so far.

[zulater]

Almost like dog years.

That's one reason Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann opposed Hillary--they said they didn't want to watch a woman age in the Oval Office.

Really? That's pretty weak on their part.