Arizona Shooting Spree, Congresswoman, judge, among victims...

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wait. So it's not insighting the same vitriolic language and emotions as long as it comes from a liberal source? Because I'm seeing a lot of this type of language in this very thread. I mean what hope is there if the conversation has been reduced to attacking Palin (who I loath, btw) because some maniac shot a bunch of people.

~String

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

For me it the fact there is no known tie of Loughner to the tea party or palin, that is the foundation of this thread. It is assumed he MUST have been influenced by these groups and cant just be a wacko all on his own.

I dont know what to make of this article because of the anonymous nature. But then some classmates did not decline to be named as the recounted their interactions with Loughner.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110110/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot_gunman_11

Advanced Poetry writing at Pima Community college and Tea baggers? Doesnt sound like a typical mix to me. But nihilist does seem to fit.

As far as him getting a gun, your not from the USA are you? There was no legal reason to deny him a gun. If he wanted to go back to that college, he would be required to provide a statement from a doctor. He did not pursue that so there was no reason for a gun purchase to be denied. He was simply another legal age citizen of AZ. His criminal record would not prohibit the purchase as far as I understand his convictions. You have to be a convicted felon or domestic violence to be denied a gun in most cases.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No, they shouldn't. People shouldn't have to censor themselves out of fear that insane people will act like, you know, insane people.

Which map thing? Palin's, or the Democrats'? And it's not uncommon for politicians and the media to use military terms for political activity.

 

Was John Kerry's comment about the need for "regime change" in America an act of treason or sedition? Was he calling for America's government to be overthrown and for Bush to be removed from power and executed like Saddam Hussein?

 

Why should anyone apologize for something they didn't do and didn't order others to do for them?

 

Thankfully so. Just as the 9/11 attacks shouldn't have diminished freedom of religion.

 

No, I'm saying we will see more violence as our economy collapses and people put under financial stress snap. It's the natural outcome to allowing the psychotic Banking Oligarchy rule our Nation - something many early Americans warned us would happen.

 

You apparently share some of the delusions he did:

If in fact we WERE ruled by a psychotic banking oligarchy then I'd take up weapons myself.

I mean what jury would convict you for killing the psychotic rulers that control us?

But since I'm sane I won't do anything that stupid.

Don't you realise that it's much more likely that it is your kind of BS that gets people like him worked up to the point of homicide?

You need to either get in touch with reality or if that is not possible then try to simply dial it down a notch or two.

Arthur

 

Mod Note: I've altered the inflammatory title of this thread.

 

What is the point of you saying this:

"Your constitution may protect your right to free speech, but those running for office and the commentators supporting them or commentating on them need to start looking at what kind of message they are sending out to the public."

If you're actually not blaming them for this incident? I mean what's the point of bringing up Pailin and her 'bullseye' if you are not somehow implicating her as being responsible for the Arizona shootings? I mean is there a point to bringing up Pailin and Tea baggers in a discussion about the nut job shooter? Coincidence or simply an after thought?

Without any evidence of Pailin's or anyone else's speech having a link to the Arizona shooting then all these musings over Pailin and others is purely speculation, rumor or an attempt to smear the Right.

If you don't know and won't say that the Republican fringe and how they conduct their national debate is at fault here then why are you spending so much time to show that these groups are advocating violence?

I mean I'm just asking.

 

@Bells

But I'm not defending them. Go back and find a post where I defend them, being a lawyer and all I trust you will be sure to come up with evidence. Right? I'm saying that there are valid reasons for the rise of a fiscal movement like the Tea Party, I'm saying there are a lot of people who feel disenfranchised and I am saying that there is nothing yet to show this single act is the result of the Tea Party movement, Pailin, Limbaugh, Hannity or any other political pundit! I am also saying that Joe's partisan politics has lead to a thread designed to smear the Tea Party movement and the Republican party and its constituents by pinning this tragedy on them which I think a mistake.

Meanwhile you contradict yourself by saying:

"I mentioned Palin because she was one of two individuals who said and did certain things that could have gone either way when it comes to this incident."

Right after you say:

"No one knows what this lunatic's true motives were."

It follows that if you believe there is no evidence to show that political pundits are the trigger then there is no reason to IMPLY that certain things Pailin said COULD have set off this incident. And why look at Pailin? Why not look at some other pundit like Beck or someone else who may have said something that could have lead to this incident (or maybe like Joe you would blame them all). If you are not implying that Republicans are to blame then there is no reason to start digging for things that Republicans have said and go on to say that it MAY have lead to a violent incident. Its nothing more than using innuendo to try and cast blame on the Right. And that is all I've been saying and you would be hard pressed to find otherwise.

As others have pointed out its not simply those on the Right who distrust the government or have fiscal concerns AND its not only those on the Right who find fault with the Democrat party or Obama administration!

 

The irony is that, looking at the new thread title, you'd think this thread was about having a fact based discussion over the shooting, when clearly it's about using the deaths of these people to feel smugly superior to one's political opponents.

For certain people here, this thread is a machine. It converts someone else's tragedy into a happy feeling of undeserved moral superiority.

 

Firslty, I'm not a person to take to conspiracy theories as I don't think the level of competence required to pull them off exists in any government . The US government didn't have anything to do with 9/11, directly.

I still believe in the vote. So, I will not be voting for Obama and will instead be voting for someone else. Someone willing to take on the Banksters head-on.

Funny enough, a total collapse of the US economy will actually help me - I will continue to do well regardless of what may come, including a major depression.

Lastly, heated rhetoric always has and always will be a part of American culture. From gun duals on the White House lawn to Talk Show Hosts to even Internet chatrooms

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

TUCSON, Ariz. – At an event roughly three years ago, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords took a question from Jared Loughner, the man accused of trying to assassinate her and killing six other people. According to two of his high school friends the question was essentially this: "What is government if words have no meaning?"

Loughner was angry about her response — she read the question and had nothing to say.

"He did not like government officials, how they spoke. Like they were just trying to cover up some conspiracy," one friend told The Associated Press on Sunday.

Both friends spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they wanted to avoid the publicity surrounding the case. To them, the question was classic Jared: confrontational, nonlinear and obsessed with how words create reality.

The friends' comments paint a picture bolstered by other former classmates and Loughner's own Internet postings: That of a social outcast with nihilistic, almost indecipherable beliefs steeped in mistrust and paranoia.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110110/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot_gunman_11

Still nothing to show that the Republicans have said anything to inspire this act. At this point we'd have a better shot of sizing him up as having a paranoid personality disorder.

 

You would have to be living under a rock not to know that there was blatant fraud which caused the financial crises. And yes many of them SHOULD have gone to jail and many regulators should have been fired.

 

I thought Stefan Molyneux had an excellent take on this issue:

True News: Gabrielle Giffords, Jared Loughner and Madness

All Stefan is doing is pointing out what should be painfully obvious but isn't with reference to the caliber of talk that passes for insight in the mainstream. Have we really come to the point where reality has become taboo? Everyone will do whatever they can to tap dance around the issue of child abuse and institutional/corporate exploitation. This is a situation where people are reading whatever their ideologically predetermined emotional preferences demand into the actions of some random, criminally motivated nut job. This tragedy isn't the responsibility of right wing or left wing politics, but it rightfully should be an opportunity to call into question assumptions about our situation as human beings, and the sort of world we've allowed to evolve in which these sorts of tragedies are actually expected, then to be followed by the obligatory politicization and sensationalizing that floods in from all corners of public discourse.

Someone like Jared Loughner just doesn't up and decide to become a dangerous basket case on a whim. If there are people responsible it's sure as hell not Sarah fricken Palin or Glenn Beck. People are responsible for their own actions and if Loughner was certifiably out of his head, as the evidence seems to indicate, than there has to be some accountability to his parents and teachers. You know, the people who actually knew him, had some legal responsibility, and could have intervened at any point in the past to assist him with his escalating mental situation. There is no need to elevate political hacks to the status of demigods.