I noticed that this one isn't being covered even though it bleeds of irony: Oh the irony: (Reuters) - Prosecutors have formally charged a victim of last week's Arizona shooting rampage with threatening a Tucson leader of the Tea Party political movement during the taping of an ABC News town hall-style television program. James Eric Fuller, 63, who was taking part in the televised forum, was involuntarily committed for psychiatric evaluation on Saturday after he grew agitated, stood up to snap a picture of Tucson Tea Party founder Trent Humphries and shouted, "You're dead," before calling others in the church a bunch of "whores," authorities said. Fuller's outburst came exactly a week after he and others were caught in a hail of bullets fired by a gunman outside a Tucson supermarket. Six people were killed and 13 others were wounded, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot through the head and remains hospitalized in critical condition. Fuller was struck twice -- in the knee and back. A 22-year-old college dropout, Jared Lee Loughner was arrested and has been charged with five federal offenses, including the attempted assassination of Giffords. What might have motivated the shootings remains unclear. The news and commentary program "Democracy Now" reported the day before Fuller's arrest, how, after being hospitalized for his wounds, he stayed up most of the night, writing down the Declaration of Independence as he tried to organize his thoughts and reactions to the trauma. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70F2IM20110116 Reading the Declaration of Independence? Maybe the document leaked the madness into his brain the same way the constitution did with Loughner. Or maybe he was responding to the political debate which blamed the shooting on Tea Party people. Maybe its just victims pay-back. Whatever it is this casting unwarranted blame for the shooting on the Right, when as the article says the motives "remain unclear", has backfired and is beginning to look like an extension of the problems concerning responses towards political debate and the perceptions in regards to both parties.
Yeah! Like Joe Pistole's musings early on in the Arizona thread about how Loughner was rambling about the monetary system and saying "Geez, where have we heard THAT before???" implying that anyone who starts quoting the constitution is a violence-prone Tea Party fanatic. http://tucsoncitizen.com/fortbuckle...rch-james-eric-fuller-before-championing-him/ Here's the cartoon mentioned... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Sarah Palin is now, apparently, herself a deadly firearm! Has she lost her MILF status, or does this only enhance it? I mean, combine that rugged, gun-toting outdoors(wo)man, that even liberals see as a "Mom-I'd **** " and make her an actual gun? Wow, totally awesome! *puke* Funny, that all the furor over the Arizona topic, and this story fell by the wayside. I'm honored to be the only response so far, I guess. Maybe people just hate Mrs. Lucysnow? Has she been cornered and pigeonholed appropriately yet? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Funny. So far, we have a crazy guy who seems to not even have a handle on his own political leanings, further buttressed by an interview with a former friend who said he had no affiliations and didn't pay attention to politics (although, he was a fan of Zeitgeist and was allegedly a 911 TRUTHER!!! or Twoofer, for those so inclined to engage in semantics). He hasn't been linked any definite party, nor has anyone provided evidence that the Tea Party[sup]TM[/sup] or Palin or anyone else's metaphors invoking guns and whatall have caused it. Nevertheless, this guy now shouts, "You're gonna die!" at a Tea Party event. Let me guess. The Tea Party[sup]TM[/sup] is responsible for this too? Even though it has only been inferred by circumstantial evidence at best, they caused the shooting, and this event was in retaliation for the shooting. Either way, it's right-wing hate speech that did it all??? We have a new magic bullet, ladies and germs. It's the Magic Vitriolic Speech Bullet. No matter how absurd or tenuous the circumstance, twas the MVSB that done it. The Warren Commission is envious.
And what happened to THIS story? None of the usual suspects managed to say something stupid? Nothing to hold on to?
I missed the part where this guy has been delivering threats and incitements to violence against selected targets, politically identified as betrayers of us and all that is good and true and therefore acceptable targets for the bughouse violent, for years and years on national media. Clue me in? This jog anyone's memory? http://www.flickr.com/photos/32245200@N00/4517352864/ Or for the more sophisticated among you guys, the ones that can handle, like, concepts and stuff: http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2011/01/dukes-of-moral-hazard.html
In Arizona, they have a huge problem with illegal immigration because they are a border state. They tried to deal with it, locally, in favor of the legal citizens, enforcing the federal laws already on the books. But the democratic party controlled US government, before the elections, shut them down in court, in favor of not enforcing US laws. Phoenix Arizona is now the kidnap capital of America. The illegal immigration plays a large role in creating this status, since Arizona is a main portal for drug traffic. Say your local police were trying to make your streets safer, but the government stopped them, not just in words, but in actions? Could an unstable person draw a broad based conclusion, especially since there is dividing line between the two parties?
I believe the poster is referring to Arizona's unconstitutional attempt to enforce federal immigration laws on the state level.
Actually, they shut them down by enforcing existing US laws, and not allowing Arizona to ignore them.
The Democratic Party has not controlled the US government for many, many years now. What are you talking about? The unstable being influenced by the sort of agitprop you seem to be influenced by, its tone and implication, is what we lefties have been warning about and pointing to examples of for years now. The situation appears to be getting worse, since a Negro was elected President - even uglier than during Clinton's terms.
What doesn't excuse the original violence? A guy deciding to verbally threaten someone by shouting "You're dead!" at a Tea Party event because he felt they had all pulled the trigger somehow? Yeah. Fuller's actions don't in any way excuse the original violence, nor do they set anything right. Totally agreed. Oh, wait, that wasn't your point? Well, then what was that point?
Normally I don't pay attention to Rush (Limbaugh, not the Canadian band) but this is perfectly applicable here. http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/content/home/daily/site_012411/content/01125108.guest.html Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! As far as I can tell, the website walmartfreedc.org has removed the offending imagery, because the two links to it mentioned on this site here http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=55596 show a different flyer. Here's an archived one from somewhere else.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! So Arizona in crosshairs + Arizona shooting = Magic Vitriolic Speech Bullet Walmart in crosshairs + Walmart shooting ≠ Magic Vitriolic Speech Bullet Or if it does equal Magic Vitriolic Speech Bullet it's still a right-wing problem? Well, after all, it IS magical.
IS DAILY KOS INVOLVED IN ARIZONA MURDERS? And apparently they deleted this from the website, just as the Walmart protest flier with crosshairs was deleted. If it's only right-wing "vitriol" and firearm metaphors used by the Tea Party that incites violence, then why are these ostensibly leftist organizations quietly deleting their own usage of such identical political propaganda devices? Surely they don't think that they could be accused as having any guilt? I mean, if only Palinites and their Tea Party[sup]TM[/sup] sycophants are to blame for acts of violence, then why try to cover anything up? As of late, Daily Kos has reinstated the deleted post, with a message (apology?)... http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...d-against-Nancy-Pelosi!-And-is-now-DEAD-to-me Democrats allegedly like the target symbol as well... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! As someone puts it quite well on this site http://www.postonpolitics.com/2010/...tricts-are-not-like-palins-crosshair-targets/ The only real difference seems to be semantical. A target is a target. The crosshairs denote something being targeted, the bullseye represents something that IS the target. How do we know they aren't using a Nerf gun? The idiocy of this faux controversy is stunning. This reminds of me of the Shirley Sherrod nonsense. She got axed by the Obama Administration, but naturally, to the professing liberals, the blame fell squarely on Andrew Breitbart, despite the fact that he was in no position to hand Sherrod her pink slip.
We can at least answer the age old question that pops up whenever the rightyranters start "analyzing" one of their disastrous fuckups or flagrant crimes: Are they lying, or are they stupid? It's possible that someone could be honestly muddled enough to compare, as equivalents, heat of the moment angry threats from one guy in the immediate wake of his being shot by a whacko, against the exact people immediately present whom he blames for inciting that whacko and selecting the whacko's victims and providing that whacko with fantasy approval and a directed outlet for his violent tendencies, and a continent wide mass media propaganda campaign of violent rhetoric and overheated language inciting violence against entire categories of enemy as well as numerous named individuals, slandering and denigrating them based on their political nature and characteristics, and encouraging their selection as targets of whackos everywhere. Although it seems just idiotic, that's actually a possible legitimate confusion in the modern climate of discourse. It's been well prepared by repetition of the ignorant and ludicrous as respectable sentiment among professional pundits, high volume reiteration of nonsense calculated to increase its plausibility via the the most sophisticated use of marketing associations and carefully traduced vocabulary ever seen on the planet. But this isn't. Nobody who can work a keyboard is stupid enough to really miss the difference between a bullseye symbol, such as the logo on my local retailer's shopping bags and kiddie carts, and a set of rifle crosshairs imposed on a named political enemy, even without the accompanying advice that if at first unsuccessful one "reload".
I've yet to see anyone prove even half way that Palin, the Tea Party[sup]TM[/sup], or any right wing media caused the Giffords shooting, which is what the professing liberals were yapping about, but in the end, their protestations seem rather shallow and inconclusive. If it hadn't been for this Arizona shooting, there wouldn't have been any topics on this in the last two weeks, I'm guessing. So let me ask again, how did right wing rhetoric and crosshairs cause Giffords to get shot in the head?
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-for-Arizona-shooting/articleshow/7256828.cms Like I just said, this crosshair business probably wouldn't even be a topic (not front page headline material, anyway) without the Arizona shooting, but so far no one has provided any reasonable connection between that campaign propaganda and the shooting, nor proven in the slightest way that Loughner was motivated by ANY right wing media. After all, Loughner worked for the Giffords' campaign at one point. That's a real solid connection to the Tea Party, isn't it? For all we know, the Daily Kos "Giffords is DEAD to me" article was a more likely influence on him than a Palin campaign graphic. I'll admit that crosshairs may not be the best graphic to use on a campaign poster, but crosshair/target, both of them imply being in someone's sight. What do you do to a target? In most cases, your shooting or throwing projectiles at it. Or I guess you could piss on one. Maybe these people should have given her a trial first? Or at least waited until her campaign staff had actually put a target or crosshair graphic over Giffords' face??? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/29/local/me-palineffigy29 I guess when a homosexual couple hangs the likeness of a conservative in West Hollywood, it's considered festive, rather than controversial? But then, one local official (probably a Republican) called it a hate crime. There he goes, spoiling the fun. Leave it to Keith Olbermann. I thought he was a liberal. I guess this is why they fired him? Too soft on the opposition? Some of those were discussed in another thread. The Kill Bush game never incited any anger. Never even heard of it. Yet somehow everyone just pissed their pants when it was Obama at a carnival game (Shoot the Alien) who was the target.
And it was deemed racially insensitive by certain persons on this board. What about this graphic? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Or this one??? http://www.behindthehype.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bush_target.jpg Or this one? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Or this one? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Are Sarah Palin and the Tea Party responsible for those as well? Why is it that certain persons only blame Republicans and affiliates for violent rhetoric? What's more violent: putting a crosshair logo on a congressional district, or hanging a life size likeness of a politician from your roof? Why is Sarah Palin responsible for any of these no matter what? Why is it only the righties as people call them, who are to blame for violent hate speech, or the acts of violence that people strain the facts to pin them on? And then there was that stupid blood libel thing. The politically correct Jewish lobby jumped on that and said her use of the phrase "blood libel" was insensitive. Now apparently the Israel lobby owns a phrase? Geez. This woman just can't get a break! And I hate to have to defend her (or Bush), because I've thought she was a silly figurehead from the get go. Mostly for looks. But the wild accusations of guilt, and the utter hypocrisy when it comes to this kind of topic, really make me angry.
