world

Arizona Rep Giffords shot, 6 killed, including judge, 9-year-old girl

282 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

282 Comments
Login to comment

Yet another nut with an easily-obtained gun.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Leave a loaded gun on the table, and nobody will get hurt unless somebody touches it. That being said, I agree crimes like this would be a lot more difficult using only "pointed sticks".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I’m a blue dog Democrat, and one that is interested in making sure that our country maintains our prosperity and frankly, our superiority over other countries

At least she was honest about what the US is all about. RIP Rep. Giffords.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

who leaves a loaded gun on a table? a child or dog could easily knock it off by accident. what a ridiculous analogy!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“I know who’s listening: Government Officials, and the People,” Loughner wrote. “Nearly all the people, who don’t know this accurate information of a new currency, aren’t aware of mind control and brainwash methods. If I have my civil rights, then this message wouldn’t have happen (sic).”

In July, a California man known for his anger over left-leaning politics engaged in a shootout with highway patrol officers after planning an attack on the ACLU and another nonprofit group. The man said he wanted to “start a revolution” by killing people at the ACLU and the Tides Foundation.

The Radical Left in America is becoming more and more dangerous. I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

lesgrande at 08:30 AM JST - 9th January

RIP Rep. Giffords.

You meant to say you wish her a speedy recovery, right?

Giffords was among at least 10 people wounded, and the hospital said her outlook was “optimistic” and that she was responding to commands from doctors.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Really sad to hear about this today. There has always been crazy people in this world but I am still surprised - or I should say - shocked all over again when something like this happens.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikehuntez-

The Radical Left in America is becoming more and more dangerous. I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across.

Do you have any idea what political "left" and "right" mean at all? clearly not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Radical Left in America is becoming more and more dangerous. I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across.

Hello, I think you got it backwards-Radical Right it should be. She was one of the politicians with a gun crosshairs on her image in Sarah Palin's ad against Obama's health care plan. Palin are you happy now?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikehuntez-

The Radical Left in America is becoming more and more dangerous. I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across.

Do you have any idea what political "left" and "right" mean at all? clearly not.

Generally Mike and his buddies are a bit, mentally-challenged, shall we say?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

She's NOT dead yet!! The stories are conflicted!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wonder how many times shootings like this have been happened until today. It seems that people can't control their guns and could not control them thereafter.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

She wasn't killed but is still in critical condition, Judge John Roll was killed though as well as some others. Saddest of the deaths is the 9ry old girl, IMO.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yeah, she isn't dead, thanks to some quick treatment.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Arizona has some of the most liberal gun laws among states. They were one of the first, if not the first, to permit concealed weapons.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yes Mike. In case you are wondering, yes I do believe that the words "left-leaning politics" were shoved in there to intentionally mislead us. This article works very hard to not say anything directly bad about rightist nuts, or brand any as such by means of simply avoiding the words, and Mike took the bait and jumped on the bandwagon quick as you please.

I am glad to see that so many other posters have learned to read carefully and actually deeply consider what was written. As ever, the people more likely to resort to violence gravitate toward the conservatives. We see the same thing with Islam: the terrorism is caused by radicals who go to the conservatives. So my question is: why don't other conservatives denounce the violent radicals? I guarantee all their comments will be lukewarm over this murder spree and simply because the people attacked don't have an R after their name.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why is it that when a tragedy happens there are people who blames it on guns? If people believe the culprit are guns then it boggles the mind. What happened to personal accountability?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is tragic. The death sentence for Loughner, please.

Giffords was barely re-elected over a Tea Party candidate. There are many Arizonans against the unconstitutuional Democrat healthcare debacle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skipbeat, no one is blaming the gun. We are just pointing out that it would have been nearly impossible to kill and injure so many with a pointed stick, or a banana.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are many Arizonans against the unconstitutuional Democrat healthcare debacle.

"Unconstitutional" doesn't mean whatever you want it to.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikehuntez,

"The Radical Left in America is becoming more and more dangerous. I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across."

What a load of absolute hogwash. When you manage to tie the words "terrorism," "gun," and "lefties" together all in one sentence, you're obviously trying too hard. Grow up.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, Sarge has stepped up to prove me wrong about conservative reaction to this conservative attack. Does he mean it? Or was it there just to prove me wrong? You be the judge.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

runwithscissors,

The point is whenever a tragedy involves a gun, people associated it with conservatives and want to take away their rights to gun ownership. The blame game starts.

It's barely the start of the New Year, this tragedy happened where families and friends lost their loved ones because of one man's action. What's is this world coming to?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

scissors - It wasn't a "conservative" attack, it was a senseless, vicious attack.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That was not what you said before skip, not remotely. Are you sure you are laying the correct accusation this time? I don't think you are, since no one associated the guns with conservatives and no one said anything about taking away gun ownership rights.

You are doing the same thing you did before: Take someone's general words and then proceed to guess all the specifics as it pleases you.

Look, it is a lot easier to control guns than it is to control nuts. Trust me, a gun is LOT easier to identify and control. All of us anti-gun people have different ideas and its no use pretending we all want the same thing just because we agree that without a gun, he could not have done this. For example, I want a strict licensing and registration system for guns. I would not complain about a total ban, but its not my first suggestion.

Zenny complained the gun was too easy to get. That would seem to mean he wants guns to be harder to get, not ban them. Could you just slow your roll and stop assuming that people lean to one extreme or another? Thanks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge said: It wasn't a "conservative" attack, it was a senseless, vicious attack.

...by a conservative...yet again.

Recently, incendiary packages were sent to government offices as protest against government fear mongering. I think the sender leaned left. You will notice that no one died and injuries were minor.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipbeat: "I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across."

I don't see too many people blaming this on guns as opposed to blaming it on the man; some people are simply point out the fact that, as runwithscissors said, the man who committed this horrible act could not have done so (or at least not nearly as easily, if at all), had he not had the gun. And yes, so early into the new year and already some nut with a gun goes on a rampage.

And who mentioned anything about conservatives? On the contrary, so far I've only seen mikehuntez 'jump the gun' and blame it on liberals (for some odd reason), but he's not been back since taking a beating by other posters (and rightfully so!). I'm only surprised he didn't blame this on Obama.

RIP to the victims, and I especially feel for the 9-year-old girl.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Confused I made 2 Posts here none mentioned Guns. Scratches head.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well smith, I am pointing out that he was a rightist. But I never said he represented rightists. What I said is that rightists attract this sort of murderous nut. Why? Well just look to Sarge who said: "The death sentence for Loughner, please."

Its the conservatives who favor execution the most. And lo and behold, one of their fold figured an execution was the answer! Are you surprised? I am not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry Zenny, it was Yabits. And I mentioned Islam. The conservatives won't because that would be like taking their own medicine. It will have to be force-fed I am afraid.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

runwithscissors,

My first comments was not a response to anyone on JT.

You have just said, "Look, it is a lot easier to control guns than it is to control nuts. Trust me, a gun is LOT easier to identify and control. All of us anti-gun people have different ideas and its no use pretending we all want the same thing just because we agree that without a gun, he could not have done this. For example, I want a strict licensing and registration system for guns. I would not complain about a total ban, but its not my first suggestion."

Your statement validated my second comment. Again, gun control always come up when gun use is involved in a tragedy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Personally, I agree with yabits about how easy it is to get a gun.

Said I am a fan of making bullets harder to get and being accountable for when and how they are used/fired.

Example: Buy them at a firing range and you can only use them there. Also certain types of bullets should not be available over the counter, etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Congratulations skip! After three posts you finally managed to say "gun control!! You are getting warmer! Now if you could just have the humility to stop acting like you said it before, because you didn't. What you said before was:

take away their rights to gun ownership.

which no one said but you. FYI, gun control does not take away rights to gun ownership. It regulates them. For example, an ex-felon has no rights to gun ownership. Gun control makes it harder for said ex-felon to get a gun.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan at 10:58 AM JST - 9th January skipbeat: "I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across."

You got me confused with someone else comments.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is an act of terrorism, brought to you by the Tea Party and NRA. Sure, the idiot could have killed with a pen knife or even a pencil, but guns are much more effective. Arizona allows concealed guns to be carried with no permit. You need a license to drive a car, which has a social benefit, transportation. You don't need a license to carry a gun, the only purpose of which is to kill something. The gun nuts say people will be safer if anybody can carry a gun. If everybody has a gun people will be deterred from committing crimes. A gun owning society is a polite society, that's what the NRA says. We can see how well that works now in Arizona.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

runwithscissors,

Depending who you ask in regards to the words "gun control?" Some people want to banned guns altogether. Whereas, some people want to tighten the laws.

If you want to live in a make-believe world that some people don't want to take away other people rights to gun ownership then you are only misleading yourself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My first comments was not a response to anyone on JT.

Okay. Does it matter? But no one is blaming guns, here or anywhere. I showed you examples. The fact that they are posts here is irrelevant. Then I explained your fallacy. Some people might not be dead clear, but we do realize it was the nut who pulled the trigger, not the gun. Come on, man. People are not that stupid! Whatever way they string words together, they are NOT that stupid. All they are saying is that without a gun he could not have done this....so get those guns under control. Taking guns away is only one, and the most extreme, form of control. There are many more. Canada and Switzerland have gun control, yet lots of guns in both places, yet far, far less gun attacks like this compared to the United States of Gun Drama. Is that so hard to understand, accept and incorporate without getting all "Cold dead hands!" on us?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And for God's sake Skip, would you please stop trying to change the past? You said what you said, okay? Saying new stuff won't fix it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow-wow-wow calm down and breath slowly.

This has nothing to do with the left or the right. This a nutcase with a gun.

Stripping your 2nd amendment won't change a thing.

runwithscissors: Gun control makes it harder for said ex-felon to get a gun.

I am not a gun advocate but it doesn't make it harder. It make it more expensive to buy one on the black market.

What the people need is education. For the rest, until we run out of ammo, we have to live with the risk of being gunned down.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To those who have sabotaged reasonable discourse with extremist rhetoric, fearmongering, deliberate misinformation, demonizing those on the other side as socialists, fascists, baby-killers, etc. : you are an inspiration to dangerous nutcases like this Arizona bloke. Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Fox and Friends have blood on their hands. The shooter may be crazy, but the right wing fear machine gave him a cause to follow. RIP to those who died unnecessarily.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Radical Left in America is becoming more and more dangerous.

Go ahead and leave out the "left" and just say, "the radical in America are becoming more and more dangerous".

America has a pretty accurate reputation for valuing a "win at all costs" attitude towards life. Competition is highly valued. It's actually great in some respects. But on the other side, it also creates a "sore loser" attitude.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Giffords was barely re-elected over a Tea Party candidate. There are many Arizonans against the unconstitutuional Democrat healthcare debacle.

This kind of illustrates my "sore loser" previous post.

It doesn't matter if she was barely re-elected. She was elected...she won. As for the healthcare "debacle" being unconstitutional...both sides have said from the beginning it will be up to the Supreme Court to decide. And if the court rules it is unconstitutional, people will need to accept that. And if the court rules it is constitutional, people will need to accept that as well.

At some point, you have to stop always complaining about things that don't always go your way and respect the process of government that is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Isn't it ironic that when you mention the "left" how defensive those who lean that way get. The left are usually the ones with paranoid delusions of which this man clearly was having talking about mind control and such. He went after someone who was closer to the center because well it just doesn't fit with his politics. Talking about inventing a new currency and illiteracy rates? He is trying to bring attention to social change of which the left surely favor. Call him what you will but I call him a radical to go out and shoot someone for his beliefs. Sorry to disappoint you all that somehow I couldn't demonize Republicans or those on the center right but you'll just have to live with it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This isn't a tragedy, it's an atrocity. Five people killed, one being a 9-year-old girl. It's beyond awful for all those involved.

But I strongly suspect that those who are reflexively pinning this to Sarah Palin, the T.E.A. Party, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh or anybody else on the right (which, as I accurately figured, are the usual JT suspects), will have quite a bit of crow to eat as more is learned about Jared Loughner.

Other facts already established: Giffords is a moderate Democrat who supports border enforcement and a few other T.E.A. Party ideals. Judge John Roll was a Bush appointee.

I see that the Associated Press isn't changing its spots any time soon. The AP writer just had to mention Palin and her "target" ad. Again, I bet the "usual JT suspects" will be surprised to learn just how irrelevant that ad was to this horrible event.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The sad thing about this tragedy is that just about anywhere in Arizona, except at a Democratic Congresswoman's public meeting, there would be citizens in the audience with handguns and this loser wouldn't have gotten off more than a few shots before he was shot himself. Arizona is an open-carry state. As long as you are not a criminal or legally insane, you can carry a handgun in an open holster. It makes for a much more polite state. Citizens often stop crimes before the police arrive. It is almost surreal to see people walking around with pistols on their belts, but it is real. True freedom. And a much better freedom than a bunch of losers smoking joints in public, the left's vision of freedom.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Again, I bet the "usual JT suspects" will be surprised to learn just how irrelevant that ad was to this horrible event.

What I am surprised about is your insistance that there can be no connection between that ad and the constant conservative position that killing is a necessary mode of justice. If you seek to ward off criticism I suggest you start by switching out of "denial" mode.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It makes for a much more polite state

Should have read, "It makes for a much more police state."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Should have read, "It makes for a much more police state."

You've never lived in a real police state, have you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikehuntez said: Isn't it ironic that when you mention the "left" how defensive those who lean that way get.

Mention the left? What you said was: "see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun"

You are like an arsonist yelling at people for campfires! You made this about politics first, and accused the wrong nutters of being the first to use violence. What I am astounded at is that your obvious trolling has not gotten you dismissed from this board.

I would prefer that no one accuse him of being right or left. Truly he only represents nutcases. What my problem is is people trying to have a set of rules for themselves and a separate set for others, because we know that if he a lefty you will blame all lefties, but if he is conservative you will not claim him. Double standard. The same double standard you use when its a nutty Muslim behind the violence. But now that its an American, oh, he was just a nut. He doesn't represent anything all the sudden. And all the crap he gleaned off the MSM and Sarah Palin? He misunderstood it! Yeah, right!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kudos to the people who tackled the killer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kudos to the people who tackled the killer.

Is that what happened? Did they need a gun to do it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And a much better freedom than a bunch of losers smoking joints in public, the left's vision of freedom.

This is a tragedy; a political attack by a left wing nut. Better freedom would have stopped it? Can we just have common sense? Where was the body guard/security? I’m all for the right to carry and the right to self defense and you are to be applauded for standing for freedom. But not all who use/condone/support legal marijuana are leftists. I can support the right of the left to be free and the freedom of the right to be left alone. I can do both, but just give me freedom. Stricter gun laws would not have stopped this, but having armed security at an open air meeting might have.

We can all support freedom, but when you start to cherry pick the freedoms you would prefer in your own personal utopia, you get fascists making sure there is only government sanctioned “freedom”. True freedom? True freedom be something you posses before God and should help your brother stay free, not encumber others with ideological grandstanding and demagoguery based on personal propaganda and judgmental rhetoric. Based on your preference, George Washington must have been a loser. "Make the most of the Indian hemp seed and sow it everywhere." George Washington

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What I am surprised about is your insistance that there can be no connection between that ad and the constant conservative position that killing is a necessary mode of justice.

Nice strawman. You're making that connection off of what, Sarge's comments that Loughner should get the death penalty if convicted? That Palin's ad had crosshair targets in it? Wow, that's flimsy. You're only seeing what you want to see because of your blind (and ill-informed) prejudice.

Just as you're trying to paint Loughner as a right-winger. How are you doing that? No, seriously, how are you justifying that to yourself? Let me hazard a guess: This was an act of violence. You think right-wingers are inherently violent. One of the high-profile victims is a Democrat. Since you're already prejudiced against anybody right-of-center, it's no trouble for you to ignore that Giffords is a "blue-dog", and is to the right of center on several issues. So for you, the circle of logic is complete.

Except that there's nothing coming out about this guy connecting him to the right. Two of his favorite books are Marx's Communist Manifesto and Hitler's Mein Kampf, two regulars on the reading lists of left-wingers and anarchists. One of his former classmates describes him in her tweets as "very liberal".

But then, I shouldn't be surprised that you can't differentiate between a death sentence for a convicted murderer and a crime of murder. You also probably can't differentiate between a criminal using a gun during a crime and a legal gun owner using a gun in self-defense (which I have done).

I would prefer that no one accuse him of being right or left.

But you've already said:

runwithscissors at 10:56 AM JST - 9th January

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"guns don't kill people, guns don't kill people haha!! yes tell me the usa does not have their heads screwed on right, i think i will get into the body bag business!!!"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If those of you advocating for more guns had bothered to do any further research than just this article, you would have come across a statement from a witness who helped detain the shooter at the scene.

The witness had his gun with him, but by the time he got there, the shooter was reloading and able to be stopped during that moment. The witness didn't draw his gun because at that time there was no need to and he felt it would just scare more people anyway.

If you have a guy who suddenly opens fire on people with an automatic or semi-automatic weapon, you don't exactly have a lot of time to react or draw your gun to try to get a shot at him. This guy shot a LOT of people in a very short amount of time. If any of them had had guns on them, they likely would have still been shot. In a panicked situation like this, do you think you would really be able to draw your gun and get the shooter before he got you? Maybe if you were twenty feet behind him at the time, but by then those people who were shot ... still would have been shot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How am I a hypocrite though WH? I said its not fair to say he represents either side. But it sure looks to me like he got his ideas from one side, and that is the problem.

I might be wrong about his "association" with conservatives. I don't mind, I will happily eat that mistake, simply because he represents neither side anyway. My point was never to tar conservatives for this man, but to tar conservatives for their politics of death that may have influenced this nut and their double standards of association (not mine. Mine are not real but just tit for tat), and to tar a certain poster for immediately shouting "LEFTY". And also there was the point of making people see the falseness of the conservative medicine so often passed around this board.

You may find the ad association and the death penalty association to be weak, but I notice you have put nothing in their place to explain this attack. Surely you don't think it was random?

Oh, I know you may claim that we don't know at this time, and you would be correct. But you don't you realize that by attacking my posts rather than those of Mikehuntz, you are just backing up many of the things I said about conservatives? Smack him for shouting "LEFTY", not me for trying to shut him down. Or do you approve of his message?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You think right-wingers are inherently violent.

No. I think the violent tend to gravitate toward the right wingers, just as the KKK types left the Dems for the Repubs long ago. People like you are very quick to point out the Dem past of the KKK, ancient history, but will not admit that something the Republicans did attract them TODAY. I am sick of that. Republicans are electing scum, supporting scum, and passing out scummy ideas. I am happy to confess to scum in the left. Its there. But denial of scum on the right burns by bottom.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In one of several Youtube videos, which featured text against a dark background, Loughner described inventing a new U.S. currency and complained about the illiteracy rate among people living in Giffords’ congressional district in Arizona.

People keep going on about this guy being hyped by the far right, never have I heard of anyone from Beck, Palin , to Limbaugh go on about how we need to get a new currency to replace the dollar. If anything, they keep going on the fact that the dollar is decling because we are overspending and need better fiscal controls.

But denial of scum on the right burns by bottom.

Think about this and I hope it cools your bottom. The suspect killed a Federal Judge, which will bring with it an automatic death sentence. I hope that he gets it. But to see the sometimes bias in the way justice is given in the US, look at McVeigh. He got the death sentence, and wason death row for about a year before he was executed. I am glad that he got a speedy execution, but when you find cases where people who do crimes like this are left leaning, their death row stints are long. I am sure that under this administratio, this person will go quickly, and I am glad. But the ones who were the DC area snipers a few years back, get to stay alive a bit longer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How am I a hypocrite though WH? I said its not fair to say he represents either side. But it sure looks to me like he got his ideas from one side, and that is the problem.

You're kidding, right? No, of course you're not. You just say he's a "conservative" and a "rightist", then turn around and say you "would prefer that no one accuse him of being right or left." And you can't see your own hypocrisy. Additionally, you previously told me to "switch out of 'denial' mode". Which is exactly what you're stuck in. Now is that hypocrisy, or projection you're practicing? Hmmm...

I might be wrong about his "association" with conservatives. I don't mind, I will happily eat that mistake, simply because he represents neither side anyway.

So he's either associated with conservatives, or nobody at all. Gotcha. ;) It's not whether he represents anyone. It's what he has been influenced by, and you can't make the connection to conservatives or anyone on the right. I can, however, make the connection to the left. And already have made two connections.

...but to tar conservatives for their politics of death that may have influenced this nut and their double standards of association...

Except you have never made any connection between conservatives' "politics of death" (Excuse me? Which is the "abortion party"? Which is the "assisted suicide" party?) and this shooter's actions.

And also there was the point of making people see the falseness of the conservative medicine so often passed around this board.

And just what "falseness" is that?

But you don't you realize that by attacking my posts rather than those of Mikehuntz, you are just backing up many of the things I said about conservatives?

No, I'm proving you wrong for claiming Loughner is a "conservative" or a "rightist". That's all.

Smack him for shouting "LEFTY", not me for trying to shut him down. Or do you approve of his message?

The reason I haven't "attacked" him is because the evidence (so far) supports him and his claim that Loughner is a Leftist. Go back to my previous post and read that third paragraph again. Or rather, read it for the first time, since you seemed to skip it before writing your response.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

First attempted political assasination in 25 years or so. What is going on?? The discourse on the US political sights is nasty and we just don't know anything right now.

Oh and alphaape if I remember correctly McVeigh asked for a quick execution.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh and we can't ignore who Rep Giffords was - an relatively unknown but very controversial political figure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No. I think the violent tend to gravitate toward the right wingers, just as the KKK types left the Dems for the Repubs long ago. People like you are very quick to point out the Dem past of the KKK, ancient history, but will not admit that something the Republicans did attract them TODAY.

You know something more about this guy then we do? Palin caused this? He's a Teaparty member? Where? What facts are you basing this on? Of course this fits the media meme that they have been harping on now ever since the Tea Party movement got started as full of violent gun toting backwards hicks prone to violence. Just as they did when that lone nut flew his Airplane into the IRS building in Texas, awhile back.

That meme is going to fail again here. More reports are coming out about this guy and his background, he is anything but Tea Party or rightwing. He is a delusion mental case right out of central casting. The article states very clear that he is a loner and a druggie....

A former classmate described Loughner as a pot-smoking loner, and the Army said he tried to enlist in December 2008 but was rejected for reasons not disclosed.

The questions I have are this.

Why wasn't he in some sort of mental health services program? And how did he get a gun, good Lord I hope he wasn't able to just purchase one with all the flags in his record.

My condolences and prayers to the victims of this tragedy. Another loner nutcase that should have been under professional care instead of being allowed to let loose on Society his total delusional insanity.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The blame game liberals are playing towards the right is disgusting and opportunistic. If you look at this shooters youtube page and read his profile, you see that 2 of his favorite books were mein kampf and the communist manifesto. He certainly was not a religious fanatic either as he is an atheist if you look at his videos. This is what the FBI and CIA fear the most as classified as a "lone wolf terrorist". He also has an obsession with some local college and mind control. As well as creating his own currency.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry, Rep Giffords "is"...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I would prefer that no one accuse him of being right or left. Truly he only represents nutcases.

That's correct. He's a nutcase. In this case a lefty one as opposed to a righty one.

What my problem is is people trying to have a set of rules for themselves and a separate set for others, because we know that if he a lefty you will blame all lefties, but if he is conservative you will not claim him.

I don't claim him because I'm not a righty and I didn't blame all lefties. You are suffering from a guilt complex maybe.

The same double standard you use when its a nutty Muslim behind the violence. But now that its an American, oh, he was just a nut. He doesn't represent anything all the sudden.

He represents some severe left leaning politics as WhiteHawk pointed out.

And all the crap he gleaned off the MSM and Sarah Palin? He misunderstood it! Yeah, right! If only their were pills for hypocrisy disease!

Again WhiteHawk pointed out your own bias of trying to twist this to right wing, Republicans who are to blame for this.

But you don't you realize that by attacking my posts rather than those of Mikehuntz, you are just backing up many of the things I said about conservatives? Smack him for shouting "LEFTY", not me for trying to shut him down. Or do you approve of his message?

So I mentioned the word "LEFTY"? Does that really bother you that much? Do you really feel the need to "shut me down"? I guess you are really a violent RIGHT WING NUTCASE then. I really dislike the nutcases on both sides. Right like you and left like Loughner. His victims really didn't deserve to die or be wounded just because they favor some slightly right wing policies. Only radicals see everyone else as radical because they are blinded by their own adrenaline.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

AiserX.

Where did you get the info about "Mein Kampf" and the communist manifesto. Not included in the articles I read they cite completely different books though like Animal Farm, Fahrenheit 451 which fit with his Youtube Videos about mindcontrol, etc.

Agree a nutcase.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This really is not the approptiate time to be trying to score political points. Show some respect to the those who have lost their lives in this senseless act of violence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Often repeated cliche.

There is this proverb Opportunity makes a thief. I see an analogy here in the way guns are so easily available in the USA. A determined criminal will always find a way to achieve his goal, but this nut acted on the spur of the moment. Guns need to be outlawed but those making a fortune off the trade with lobbying in congress won't allow it. The annual death toll means nothing to them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Then what?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Presto345, there's a small problem with you solution and it has nothing to do with Congress making money off of lobbyists... it is unconstitutional to outlaw guns. Cities have tried it and states have tried it, and every time it fails the test against the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The problem isn't Congress, the problem is the piece of paper that the entire government is based on. What REALLY needs to happen is a Constitutional Convention in each State tackling the job of amending the 2nd Amendment. The difficulty is that each state has to have one of these conventions and at least 75% of the conventions have to vote for the change before it can happen. That means 38 out of 50 states, minimum, have to agree to the change.

The difficulty is compounded by the general belief that our founding fathers were infallable and anything they did cannot be changed. The world changed and we still try to keep our government locked into ideas that coexisted with horse and buggy transportation as the main means of getting around.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

AiserX: "The blame game liberals are playing towards the right is disgusting and opportunistic."

What is the first comment on this thread that mentions ANYTHING about 'right' or 'left'? that's correct, it was mikehuntez saying, "The Radical Left in America is becoming more and more dangerous. I hope this woman can recover and the US doesn't have to see more terrorism from radical lefties who always resort to the barrel of a gun to get their politics across."

So... care to rephrase your comment again, my friend? or is this a case of "when YOU say it it's bad, but if I say it it's okay"?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This kind of massacre will unfortunately continue in the U.S. until the stance on gun laws change.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Democrat Gabrielle Giffords owns a Glock handgun. She regards gun ownership as a constitutional right.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My take on this is that yes this guy is a nut case. But thanks to the NRA promoting that everyone (including nut cases) has a right to gun ownership, this guy could get his weapon.

And while he may not be a card-carrying member of the TEA Party or on Palin's i-phone address list, it IS the Tea Party that has been flooding the airwaves and filling this nutcase's TV, internet, and apparently his head with all the rhetoric about how bad Giffords was for supporting healthcare. Palin used crosshairs in her campaign against Giffords and her Tea Party opponent encouraged people to fire off an M-16 in support of getting rid of her.

With all that negative media bombardment, Faux News and the Tea Party were all but telling him to go kill Giffords. In his crazy mind, he just took their political rhetoric for an actual order to kill. And now that he has, the far right is playing it off by saying that since their fingerprints aren't on the gun or the ammo, they aren't responsible for the hate they fed him. That's total B.S. Spreading hate has brought about this turn of events, and I doubt it will be the last as long as Palin and the Tea Party keep up their messages of hate.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tragic. The poor, dead nine year old was apparently born on 11th September 2001 and had an avid interest in politics.

It's probably wishful thinking on my part, but here's to hoping this horrible event is a catalyst for Americans to realize how crazy their politics have become.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US and its guns. Leave 'em to it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Famed constitutional lawyer and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, who defended O.J. Simpson and Claus von Bulow, is a former ACLU national board member who admits he "hates" guns and wants the Second Amendment repealed. Yet, says Dershowitz: "Foolish liberals who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a safety hazard don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don't like."

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms."

--Aristotle

Personally, I have never owned a firearm.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh come one people, this isn't about gun control. Need I remind you that some nutcase in Akihabara managed to kill 7 people with knives a year and a half ago? Ban knives and they'll use vehicles. Ban vehicles and they'll use something else.

The bottom line is that this guy was mentally unstable and stuck in a society so uncaring that he never received the treatment he needed. If he'd been properly identified and institutionalised then this incident would never have happened.

It's more than a little ironic that the democrats have been calling for more comprehensive health care (including mental health) and have been roundly criticised for trying to fix something that isn't broken... and then this happens to prove their point beyond all doubt. It's a tragedy that it had to happen at the expense of 6 lives, including an innocent little girls'.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Blame, Blame, Blame and no one in America is willing to "man up" and accept responsibility, whether it is the shooter with the gun, the media with the words of violence, or the politicians with the symbols of violence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just leave ALL the guns at gun clubs. What will happen if mad people, or unstable people just keep killing cream of the crop of people in US ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Maybe I'm just being European Frungy, but Ifail to see how healthcare reforms could have halted this individual from opening fire.

Though I agree about these debates always turning into a pro/anti gun debate. Banning guns in the US is like lobbying to stop the sunrise at dawn. Just 'aint gonna happen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've just read up on the murdered judge too. Apparently his office received countless death threats after allowing illegal immigrants to sue an Arizona land-owner. That's'some malaise you guy's over there afterall :-o

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The spelling of Christina Green's last name should be corrected; there's no 'e' on the end.

She was the grand-daughter of former baseball manager and executive Dallas Green, famous for his many successful years with the Phillies, Cubs, and Mets. He created winning teams wherever he went, and it looks like his progeny were winners too. Rest in peace, Christina.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have voted Democrat more times than Republican in my life.People change sides. It is hardly as black and white as you imagine. Believe me, an Arizona Democrat is not the same as a Massachusetts Barney Frank or a NY Chucky Schumer. The judge that was killed by the wacko was a Bush appointee, and apparently republican. But you don't see conservatives on here saying Dems must be gleeful over his death, do you. Read the killer's stuff - his YouTube channel was all about burning the US flag. He appeared to be schizo. Shame on anyone trying to make political points off of meaningless tragic deaths. Oh, and for the gun control advocates here is something to consider~Mexicans march into Arizona carrying guns, in spite of Mexico's gun conntrol laws. They invade our country already armed. If the killer wanted a gun US and Arizona laws would have made little differeence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wish the media wouldn't make a big deal out of the fact that the 9-year-old girl who died was born on 9/11, 2001, as if there was something symbolic about it. There is no relationship between her birth date and this tragedy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course he's a wacko, but they get influenced by what they hear and see. He seems like many of those Tea Partiers-mixed up and confused about all different ideologies. Tea Partiers (certainly closer to Republicans on the Right) complaining about Democrat (Liberal) Obama's "Socialist" healthcare plan, while holding up posters of him with a Hitler mustache (Fascist), and hammer and sickles (Communism).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course the hate in American politics and notably the screaning right wing talk shows are a factor. It doesn't take much to push nutters over the edge.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, and for the gun control advocates here is something to consider~Mexicans march into Arizona carrying guns, in spite of Mexico's gun conntrol laws. They invade our country already armed. If the killer wanted a gun US and Arizona laws would have made little differeence.

Do a bit of research, there have been many studies that show the majority of guns used by the cartels in Mexico come from the USA. Our lax laws allow guns to be sold then smuggled to Mexico

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course he's a wacko, but they get influenced by what they hear and see.

We'll never know I guess.

If you are going to try and blame conservative talk radio when the killer listed The Communist Manifesto as one of his fav books well then maybe Obama's overheated rhetoric from 2008

"If They bring a knife to the fight we bring a gun"

should be considered; I mean if you want to go for full conspiracy looniness here...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course he's a wacko, but they get influenced by what they hear and see. He seems like many of those Tea Partiers-mixed up and confused about all different ideologies.

Of course the hate in American politics and notably the screaning right wing talk shows are a factor. It doesn't take much to push nutters over the edge.

I'm still waiting for some sort of any proof, any proof at all that this 22 two year old pot smoking, still living with Mom and Dad, suspended community college student loser was a Tea Party supporter or even watched Beck or listened to Limbaugh or even cared about Palin.

You folks holding back some hidden information that the rest of us would like to know?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

‎"No! I won’t trust in God." - Arizona Shooter, Jarod Loughner

just another 'friendly' and 'good hearted ' atheist, eh?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Repent,

Who cares what he said, if he indeed said that. He's a nutter. Leave God and atheists alone please!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm still waiting for some sort of any proof, any proof at all that this 22 two year old pot smoking, still living with Mom and Dad, suspended community college student loser was a Tea Party supporter or even watched Beck or listened to Limbaugh or even cared about Palin.

This is absolutely true, but the fact that Palin sent a tweet after healthcare reform asking her supporters to "don't retreat, reload", and included a link to her Facebook page which had a map of the USA with congressional districts that voted for Obama's reforms targeted with gun crosshairs (including Giffords') is absolutely abhorrent. And today she sends her condolences to the victims and their families.......

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Quote: Lynda Sorenson said she took a math class with Loughner last summer at Pima Community College’s Northwest campus and told the Arizona Daily Star he was “obviously very disturbed.” “He disrupted class frequently with nonsensical outbursts,” she said.

Is anyone asking how someone like this was able to get a Glock with a 30-round mag?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The guy was obviously a nut case on the fringes, so any attempt to label him "left", "right" or whatever else would be wrong. From the ramblings they showed on the news, it seems he believed the government were try to use mind control to brainwash people into certain ideas, for example, that money had to be backed by gold or silver or that it mentioned God. He believed the government were using grammar to control people. He thought he had to do something about it, and did so. He was clearly unwell.

I think the key point here is as nandakandmanda said: How was someone like this able to get a Glock with a 30-round mag?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As much as I loathe the dolt palin, people are making too much about this whole cross-hairs thing, I think. It was in incredibly poor taste, as was the 'reload' thing, of course, but much of the angst about the whole thing is in retrospect. I don't think too many people on ANY side are cheering for this kind of thing to happen, nor do they actually cheer when it does -- only sickos would.

SolidariTea: I don't agree with the latter part of your post as a justification for the foolish gun-laws of the US, nor do I see any proof to back up your claims of the 'army' of Mexicans crossing over to arm Americans who can't otherwise get weapons, but the first part of your post is pretty sound -- this guy was indeed a whacko.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course the hate in American politics and notably the screaning right wing talk shows are a factor. It doesn't take much to push nutters over the edge.

You really don't want to try to make this a left/right issue. There have been significantly more left-wing nuts out there recently. That this one appears to be a right-wing nutcase doesn't change the fact that he is obviously, a nutcase. As others have pointed out, I think the greater question is, how did someone who is apparently mentally disturbed, acquire a handgun?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't see too many people blaming this on guns as opposed to blaming it on the man; some people are simply point out the fact that, as runwithscissors said, the man who committed this horrible act could not have done so (or at least not nearly as easily, if at all), had he not had the gun.

The problem with that argument is that it is said every single time a person kills someone with a gun, its an old tired argument that isn't going to change anything.

The other problem I have with that argument is that it just isn't true, you take a care and run it through such a tightly packed place like that was and you could easily kill just as many people. Take a homemade flamethrower, they are not that hard to make take a super soaker and fill it will a flammable liquid and then attach a lighter at the nozzle, you could easily kill a lot of people very quickly and painfully.

There are many tools and toys that are available today legally that can kill just as easily as a gun.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

you take a care

I meant "car"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sick country.

To those of you saying "guns don't kill people", what an absolutely ludicrous statement.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is absolutely true, but the fact that Palin sent a tweet after healthcare reform asking her supporters to "don't retreat, reload", and included a link to her Facebook page which had a map of the USA with congressional districts that voted for Obama's reforms targeted with gun crosshairs (including Giffords') is absolutely abhorrent.

The map she used had districts "targeted" with a surveyor’s symbol. The same symbol surveyors use when "targeting" a site prior to construction. An opaque circle with the cross lines extending outside of the symbol at the cardinal axis points.......It wasn't a scope site with gun crosshairs. A gun sight has the cardinal axis points terminating inside the circle and with 360 degree tic marks inside the inner circle radius.

Look it up. That one was debunked a long time ago, not that the media did any research on that one at that time either, or even now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“Arizona is a state where people are firearms owners — this was just a deranged individual.”

Cretin. People who own firearms to use on other people are deragned. Simple.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The map she used had districts "targeted" with a surveyor’s symbol.

I suggest you google or yahoo image search "gunsight symbol" and see how many of the images have crosshairs extending outside the circle radius.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Noliving, you have quite an imagination. A super soaker flamethrower? Dude, most people don't even know how to properly change the oil in a car. Most people, even the nuts, are not going to mess with that. If they do, most will only kill themselves.

As for the car, most killers are trying to kill certain people. Even this nut had his target. Its hard to kill certain people with a car unless you manage to get them at just the right time and hope they don't move off to the side. No way he could have gotten to this politician like that without one heck of a lot of luck. And even with luck, he never could have got the politican and the judge together.

Face it. You are talking nonsense from your imagination. Guns make killing a snap. And that is a problem. Besides, if your argument had any basis in reality, we may as well just let anyone buy military grade flamethrowers, rocket launchers and automatic rifles. There are good reasons we can't. I hope one day you will figure out what they are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I suggest you google or yahoo image search "gunsight symbol" and see how many of the images have crosshairs extending outside the circle radius.

I did, may I suggest that you do a google or yahoo image search on "palin map symbol" and then another on "DNC Targeting Strategy" and compare the maps and imagery, which one was more benign?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Then you know they look the same (Palin's symbol and a gunsight symbol). Thank you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am serious when I say that pro-death penalty and pro-gun are traditional conservative positions. And holding those positions is much like a smoking father telling his kids not to smoke. Its too late, he already set the example, and so often the kids will go with the example rather than the order. Its human nature and it just goes double for nuts. The U.S. of A. is a hot bed of gun violence compared to other first world countries, and yes, the reason why is because America leans toward those conservative positions. Whatever books this guy read, whatever party he claimed, whether his politics leaned mostly one way or was a hodge podge mix, I think its highly probable that American gun culture, "hang 'em high" attitude and yes the ad with crosshairs too took a toll on his fragile mind.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He smoked pot, I don’t know how regularly

People on this board seem to keep making it an issue of gun control, but let's look at this statement about him. He smoked pot, which is illegal in the US (no matter what California says).

Pot is illegal, yet he can still get it. Where is the outrage from those who want to ban guns on the fact that this guy was using a banned substance. So if we make pot legal, I guess we will not have these types of incidents happening, since the anti-gun lobby keeps saying that if we make guns illegal, then there would be less cases of people shooting at each other.

This guy was a loner and troubled. But he had a clean record, and by law he could legally obtain a fire arm. If we want to ban guns to people who prove to be mentally unstable (which is not predictable in this case) then we may as well also ban them from driving or owning a knife.

I hope this guy gets a speedy trial and execution.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What's really sad and ironic is the way the media is trying to blame this atrocity on hysteria and rhetoric......by spreading more hysteria and rhetoric. There have been some truly disgusting displays of opportunism out there. If I had my druthers, the news networks would ban political commentators of all stripes.

It is deplorable that we don't have an independent media in this country... only a propaganda machine. Are we really free here or what?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The map she used had districts "targeted" with a surveyor’s symbol.

Now THAT, is desperation!

However, he is correct that there are inexcusable ads on both sides. The gun and violence imagery in American politics needs to end. That is R or D; it is simply and embarrassingly American.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphaape: Where is the outrage from those who want to ban guns on the fact that this guy was using a banned substance.

The outrage is in the same place as outrage over speeding compared to a vehicular manslaughter! Marijuana cannot be used to kill, not even the user! Why, oh, why would people be more worried about things that cause the deaths of 9 year old girls, House Reps and Federal judges? Can you seriously not answer that question?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I hope this guy gets a speedy trial and execution.

He killed a federal judge in Arizona. I can't see anything but the death penalty....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Americans & their guns, we will continue to see this type of incident happen again, again & again for yrs to come, its a by product of the US's gun culture, shoganai ne

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I doubt he will be handed the death penalty. The Supreme Court has long held that it is cruel and unusual punishment to execute the insane.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let's see the facts. He'll probably try the indsane route, but it lkooks premeditated to me on todays sources. Hopefully they'll be nabbing the accomplice anytime soon...

I think it's pretty insane to rule out a political motive too at this stage...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Further reading shows that not only had the wounded congress-woman had her offices trashed, but some other right-wing crank had already threatened her November las when most of the tea party were in a red-eyed frenzy.

It would seem to me the local Sheriff put it most eloquently:

"Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said a consuming atmosphere of political vitriol centred on Arizona may have been a factor.

"The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous," he said. "And unfortunately, Arizona, I think, has become the capital. We have become the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Frungy:

Oh come one people, this isn't about gun control. Need I remind you that some nutcase in Akihabara managed to kill 7 people with knives a year and a half ago? Ban knives and they'll use vehicles. Ban vehicles and they'll use something else.

The bottom line is that this guy was mentally unstable and stuck in a society so uncaring that he never received the treatment he needed. If he'd been properly identified and institutionalised then this incident would never have happened.

An associate in Australia tells me that since their gun ban and confiscation, people use broken beer bottles. Makes a mass killing like this more difficult, but people are still being murdered by violent killers.

There once was a time when people like Loughner would have been institutionalized. But a Supreme Court ruling back in the 70's found that people could only be institutionalized if they proved to be a danger to themselves and others. The homeless population immediately skyrocketed as mental institutions were closed across the country. Enrollment at UC Berkeley went up, however. (Okay, just kidding about that last one!)

qazwsx:

Of course he's a wacko, but they get influenced by what they hear and see. He seems like many of those Tea Partiers-mixed up and confused about all different ideologies. Tea Partiers (certainly closer to Republicans on the Right) complaining about Democrat (Liberal) Obama's "Socialist" healthcare plan, while holding up posters of him with a Hitler mustache (Fascist), and hammer and sickles (Communism).

This is absolutely true, but the fact that Palin sent a tweet after healthcare reform asking her supporters to "don't retreat, reload", and included a link to her Facebook page which had a map of the USA with congressional districts that voted for Obama's reforms targeted with gun crosshairs (including Giffords') is absolutely abhorrent. And today she sends her condolences to the victims and their families.......

It's becoming more and more apparent that Loughner wasn't listening to Palin or anyone else on the right. Besides, Markos Moulitsas (DailyKos) also used a bullseye ad during the last election, including a bullseye on Arizona. If that's not enough for you, he also claimed "GIFFORDS IS DEAD TO ME" just two days before she was shot.

But then you only remember right-of-center people carrying protest signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache, and don't seem to remember the eight years of Leftists carrying protests signs of G.W. bush with a Hitler mustache. So there's probably no reaching you.

Do a bit of research, there have been many studies that show the majority of guns used by the cartels in Mexico come from the USA. Our lax laws allow guns to be sold then smuggled to Mexico

That's already been debunked.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

nandakandamanda

Is anyone asking how someone like this was able to get a Glock with a 30-round mag?

I am; just haven't asked it here.

chotto:

Cretin. People who own firearms to use on other people are deragned. Simple.

When not in self-defense, yes.

Junnama:

I suggest you google or yahoo image search "gunsight symbol" and see how many of the images have crosshairs extending outside the circle radius.

That doesn't change the fact that gun scopes physically do not have crosshairs extending outside the circle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That doesn't change the fact that gun scopes physically do not have crosshairs extending outside the circle.

A real mouse doesn't wear pants, but it doesn't change the fact that if you draw Mickey Mouse people are going to know he's a mouse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

runwithscissors:

WhiteHawk, instead of trying to "win" the argument, just go back to Mikehuntz's first post. Most of what I said about righties and conservatives was just bile to spew on that utter tripe. He started it.

Stop blaming Mikehuntz for your posts and take responsibility for your own actions.

You just want your "win" fix. And that is part of the reason you refuse to condemn his obnoxious post.

I've already told you why I haven't condemned his post. You just don't like my answer.

But I am serious when I say that pro-death penalty and pro-gun are traditional conservative positions. And holding those positions is much like a smoking father telling his kids not to smoke. Its too late, he already set the example, and so often the kids will go with the example rather than the order. Its human nature and it just goes double for nuts.

Using a gun in self-defense is a conservative position. Using a gun for a killing spree of innocent people is not a conservative position. Again, it's telling that you cannot see the difference.

The U.S. of A. is a hot bed of gun violence compared to other first world countries, and yes, the reason why is because America leans toward those conservative positions.

Actually, it's because of all the loose criminals in America, armed or not. Despite all the gun laws, more criminals possess guns in America than probably any other country on Earth. (Ironically for anti-gun people, gun violence is the worst in cities where gun laws are the strictest, or gun bans have been in place for decades.) Not that they always need guns to commit crimes, like the guy who tried to mug me. The difference is, in America, private citizens in most states can arm themselves against those criminals.

The outrage is in the same place as outrage over speeding compared to a vehicular manslaughter! Marijuana cannot be used to kill, not even the user!

Never heard of drunk driving? Hasn't marijuana use been shown to cause or increase paranoia?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Junnama:

A real mouse doesn't wear pants, but it doesn't change the fact that if you draw Mickey Mouse people are going to know he's a mouse.

Except that intelligent (and sane) people know that Mickey Mouse is a cartoon.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Except that intelligent (and sane) people know that Mickey Mouse is a cartoon.

And sane and intelligent people know those are gunsights. The whole surveyors symbols is comical to even hear.

I'll grant I'm sure this turn of events was not what they were thinking of when they put them on that map.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Correction:

It wasn't Morkos Moulitsas (DailyKos) who wrote that Giffords was "dead to me", but rather a blogger named "BoyBlue" on his site. Still, Moulitsas did use bullseye targets on ads during the previous election, including a bullseye on Arizona.

That certain JT posters can only find enough room in their posts to bash Palin is... telling. And predictable, frankly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't know about Moulitsas. I hope his defenders didn't come on here trying to tell us they weren't bullseyes but actually teacups. Because they would look pretty stupid saying it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow. Just read that he obtained his gun legally. I guess the next question would be, if he had a history of being mentally unstable, how was he legally allowed to obtain and keep a gun?

Now I know some people will say, "A more strict gun law would not have prevented him from doing this. He would have been able to get one on the black market". That would probably be true. But if you are going to use that logic, then why doesn't the USA go ahead and make cocaine and heroin legal...and while you are at it, bazookas and RPGs etc.

There are shades of gray inbetween black and white.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Junnama:

Don't know about Moulitsas.

I'm not surprised. But you knew about Palin's ad. And you don't stop to ask yourself why that is.

I'm seeing a pattern here, and it has to do with the obsession with Palin practiced by the left-of-center which populate the media. Groupthink, anyone?

Say, anybody remember the trouncing Palin got for her "Don't party like it's 1773 yet" tweet after the November elections? Or was it an FB post? In any case, Leftists all over the media pounced on her comment, ridiculing her and calling her stupid. Only they had to backtrack when it turned out that 1773 was the year of the Boston Tea Party and Palin knew her American history better than the media Leftists who ridiculed her.

Moulitsas participated in that one too. As did NPR mouthpiece and presidential debate moderator Gwen Ifill.

That was funny. Palin-haters and the like trying to link a Palin ad to yesterday's shooting in order to justify their prejudice isn't funny.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whitey,

Palin-bashing will become a national sport next year. I'm dreading he hyesteria, naturally, at the same time impatient for Tina Fey's take and Ms Palin's rightful return to Alaska/obscurity.

Let me know when some leftist American nutcase has trashed her office, threatened her with menacing 'phone calls or even a gun, as Mrs Giffords has been.

The radical left are a rightious pain in the back-side I'll admit, but they cannot vomit up the froth, bile nor hate that comes from their opposing extremist right-wing brothers...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The ramifications of this tragedy is free speech will be censored and politicians will have security like the President/VP. Slowly people's freedom will be restricted in the name of security with no freedom at all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts,

Just as you weren't made aware of Moulitsas' bullseye ads, you haven't been made aware of the death threats against Sarah Palin, because they don't fit the left-wing media's template. JT won't let me post links, so I will just have to ask you to put your blinders down and look for:

fireandreamitchell /2010/03/25/left-wing-extremist-issues-death-threats-against-sarah-palin-tea-party-members-and-eric-cantor-on-twitter

You will likely complain that the source isn't Leftist-approved, like CNN, NPR, or the NYT. But that's my point: The left-leaning media (which is the majority of the news media) ignore whatever doesn't fit their own prejudice.

And while that same media couldn't ignore the death threats against Bristol Palin over her appearance on a "reality" TV show (No wonder there's not a single Democrat voter who doesn't think Sarah Palin said "I can see Russia from my house".), they didn't treat those threats with the same tone as they're treating her mother's ad from last year's election. Yet they can ignore a DailyKos bullseye ad run during the same election. Myopia, anyone?

The radical left are a rightious pain in the back-side I'll admit, but they cannot vomit up the froth, bile nor hate that comes from their opposing extremist right-wing brothers...

Really? Ever watched coverage of a G20 riot? Ever read Michelle Malkin's hate mail? (Malkin had to move her family, you know, because of death threats. Yet she's never said or printed anything on the level of the venom that is directed at her.) Ever read the wishes for a slow and painful death from cancer that Laura Ingraham received?

You're not looking.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry bud, Bristol Palin, like il madre, deserve the damage to the panes within the glass houses they throw stones.

And it's not just Ms Giffords...look at the slain judges death threats. 200 per day? A Federal judge?

Thankfully those kind of people are given a prison cell

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Where I reside..

Whoops!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Now that I read more about this guy I think he was schitzo and he swung from extreme left to extreme right being dangerous only when he was in the extremes and more stable when he was closer to the middle. Just read his crap. Government using grammar (of which he doesn't master) to control people? Currency needing gold and silver to back it? What makes him think it's not? Do not trust in God? His choice but only an extreme left nut would declare himself as atheist as that. I just happen to think that when he shot those people he was in his left swing of extremism. And so far the most level headed comments that I've read here come from WhiteHawk. He must be some kinda right of center loon in the extremists viewpoint. Better get out the big guns to enforce your severely left of center views. I think you guys have shown us enough hypocrisy for once. Lets give it a rest and hope for the lady's recovery. I don't care about her politics. She doesn't shoot people for it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The latest is the slug passed through the left side of her brain though despite this, basic cognisance is apparent. I'd never really heard of this lady until yesterday iun all honesty, but I wish her a speedy recovery and return to politics.

Sane America needs more hero's such as these.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts:

Sorry bud, Bristol Palin, like il madre, deserve the damage to the panes within the glass houses they throw stones.

Bristol Palin deserved death threats?!? Over a dance show?!? That's odd, I don't recall Bristol, Sarah, or any of the Palin family issuing death threats against anybody.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The latest is that Giffords is able to communicate, albeit simply, and recognize her family. Doctors are optimistic, although cautiously noting that her recovery may well be a difficult one.

Also, the police are searching for a possible second suspect. Perhaps someone took the shooter under their wing and influenced him?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sane America needs more hero's such as these.

Sorry, but how exactly is she a hero? A victim sure, a hero, no. I'm from Arizona, her district is adjacent to mine. She barely won re-election despite being in a largely democrat district. Based on her voting record, calling her a hero is not merited. Based on her actions, she is not a hero. While I certainly hope she recovers, her voting record makes me hope she takes early retirement. Unfortunately, I suspect that if she makes a full recovery, as all of us hope she does, then Arizona will be stuck with her forever, as the people in her district won't ever have the courage to vote against her, regardless of what she votes for.

Bristol Palin deserved death threats?!? Over a dance show?!? That's odd, I don't recall Bristol, Sarah, or any of the Palin family issuing death threats against anybody.

Yeah, that was just wrong.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Meh, the illigitimate child. Plus the moher's shrieking.

Trust the extreme right to take my comments and twist 'em.

Game. Set. Match.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir,

She's taken a slug though the brain and she's still kicking. Not only that, but I like what I read about her.

Just surviving this means she's a hero to me. Sorry you guys can't set your political stands aside to join me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, and Bokhuto, the crosshairs will be interpreted in a different manner now, legitimate or not. You right-wing jobs are perhaps finally going to learn that your PR might coime back to bite you in the ass. Mission Accomplished anyone?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Noliving, you have quite an imagination. A super soaker flamethrower? Dude, most people don't even know how to properly change the oil in a car. Most people, even the nuts, are not going to mess with that. If they do, most will only kill themselves.

Its called youtube, you can see a whole bunch of videos of people using supersoakers that are flamethrowers and turning them into flamethrowers its not that hard at all. You fill up the bottle with some type of flammable fluid and add a lighter to the end of the nozzle and then burn away.

No most people don't even injure themselves with a supersoaker flamethrower.

The car point still stands, you can kill a whole bunch of people very quickly with them.

Yes guns do make killing a snap, so do cars and homemade flamethrowers even knives and bats. Do you even know what a military grade flamethrower is?

Its hard to kill certain people with a car unless you manage to get them at just the right time and hope they don't move off to the side.

That is true with any object being used as a weapon, especially a gun, especially if they move off to the side and out of the guns sights.

Face it killing people by running them over with a car is a lot easier then you think it is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When people don't agree with you it's very convenient to label them "right-wing jobs" isn't it? I think the government is controlling you with grammar.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts:

Meh, the illigitimate child. Plus the moher's shrieking.

Trust the extreme right to take my comments and twist 'em.

Game. Set. Match.

Blaming others for your own inability to express yourself? Did you and runwithscissors take the same English class?

Oh, and Bokhuto, the crosshairs will be interpreted in a different manner now, legitimate or not. You right-wing jobs are perhaps finally going to learn that your PR might coime back to bite you in the

But only Palin's crosshairs, and not Moulitsas' crosshairs (or one of his bloggers saying that Giffords is "dead" to them), is that right?

Could you be more partisan or myopic?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WhiteHawk

When not in self-defense, yes.

No, period.

The logic that "I need a gun to defend myself incase someone uses one on me" is compltely flawed logic. How on earth do you use a gun in "self defence"? Sharp-shoot a bullet into their wrist and disarm them from whatever weapon they might be carrying?

The fact that anyone has the right to own a gun is an unfortunate, out-dated law. All it takes is for one nut-job to lose it or snap, and carnage ensues. Columbine?

Believe it or not, you do NOT need guns to function as a society and keep law and order. And the above article is a classic case of why the public should not be allowed anywhere near a firearm, let alone OWN one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How on earth do you use a gun in "self defence"? Sharp-shoot a bullet into their wrist and disarm them from whatever weapon they might be carrying?

How are you defining self defense?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wasn't sure how much this country has been suffering from the sickness of mental health-- especially after 9/11, because I’ve seen this in my home country for ten years. But, I will tell you. America really needs to cope with "mental illness" which leads some people to political violence. This incident is a wake-up call. Sure, you have the right to speak for/against the national politics, but you have absolutely no rights to go insane so far as to kill innocent people's lives!

My deep condolences to the families and friends of lost ones.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In Hawaii its pretty tough to get a gun, and there haven't been any massive killing sprees like on the mainland. A more mellow place to live for sure, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that part of the allure for low esteem misfits is the glamour of blowing away people like they do in the movies. I seriously doubt your average loserville Joe could take out 18 people by other means.

During his campaign effort to unseat Giffords in November, Republican challenger Jesse Kelly held fundraisers where he urged supporters to help remove Giffords from office by joining him to shoot a fully loaded M-16 rifle. Kelly is a former Marine who served in Iraq and was pictured on his website in military gear holding his automatic weapon and promoting the event.

Mmm, just a coincidence, I'd say...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I seriously doubt your average loserville Joe could take out 18 people by other means.

Think he could have done it if he drove his car at high speed through the crowd?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What the hell is with all the people on this page blaming this on leftists? Why would leftists attack leftists? You people are idiots.The guy who did this is a right wing radical. To blame this on the left after all the violent rhetoric from tea party hacks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I just happen to think that when he shot those people he was in his left swing of extremism.

This guy's rantings were also based on right wing rhetoric, not just crazy ideas from his head. The conspiracy theory about "conscious dreaming" (sic) is from UK right winger is David Icke. His "government controls grammar" is also from a radical right-winger David Wynn Miller (he murdered two cops)of the "Sovereign Citizen" movement. The gold standard rantings are prominent values of libertarian ,radical rightists, most prominently the right wing media star Glenn Beck (he is also sponsored by a company backing the gold standard). He specifically cited Gifford's district as one that uses grammar to control the minds of the people.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What the hell is with all the people on this page blaming this on leftists? Why would leftists attack leftists?

This guy lists Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto among his favorite books and also criticizes the US Constitution. Sounds like a Lefty to me. Or perhaps he is just a mad man...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@mikehuntez

"Think he could have done it if he drove his car at high speed through the crowd?"

Mikey, come on, d'you think they're just gonna let cars through into the area like that? People on foot, yeah, cos those events are designed to be interactive and people-friendly, but not to the extent of just letting traffic cruise all around.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What the hell is with all the people on this page blaming this on leftists? Why would leftists attack leftists? You people are idiots.The guy who did this is a right wing radical. To blame this on the left after all the violent rhetoric from tea party hacks.

Well, lefties have a long history of violent actions. Leftist governments like Chinas for example murdered millions, in the name of the supposed greater good. Individuals too have committed tons of violent actions. Look at the guy in Florida for example, or the woman college professor who walked into a staff meeting and shot the place up. No, theres plenty of examples of left-wing hate and violence. In fact theres more of that then there is on the right. This guy may be a right-wing loon, or a left-wing loon, though based on his reading material I lean towards the left. When it comes down to it though, it doesn't really matter. This isn't a right/left issue. Its a nutcase issue, just like it was in those other cases. Trying to make it into a right/left thing, is a way of trying to demonize those who disagree with you. And unlike those on the left who seem to want to silence those who disagree, I want to hear from everyone, and then make my own decisions. Its sad that they can't handle that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@lesgrande

Come on les, don't you think that someone trying to kill others no matter having a gun or not that they couldn't find some other way to do the killing? Japan proves it as it happened in Akihabara. Why is reality hard to accept?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

don't you think that someone trying to kill others no matter having a gun or not that they couldn't find some other way to do the killing?

Well, I do. And 5 percent of the time, they will. But some people just can't comprehend the difference between possible and probable, and seem to actually rejoice when other people die. I suppose it makes for great drama?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But some people just can't comprehend the difference between possible and probable, and seem to actually rejoice when other people die. I suppose it makes for great drama?

Whose rejoicing in these deaths? Not me or anyone else here. But I see some rejoicing in blaming all right-wingers just because I called him an extreme leftist based on his readings. I suppose it makes for great reading though.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"B-b-b-but he read the Communist Manifesto!"

The cognitive dissonance on the right must be agonizing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir said: In fact theres more of that then there is on the right.

That will depend greatly on how you count. How do you count violence?

Sticking to America, one thing I think you fail to appreciate is that the whole of America leans right. As the world understands the term, there are precious few left wingers in America. And America is the Somalia of the first world. But it still seems to me that the violent and the hateful lean conservative rather than liberal when the weather is fair.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the Army said he tried to enlist in December 2008 but was rejected for reasons not disclosed.

Physically unfit?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SiouxChief:

" The cognitive dissonance on the right must be agonizing. "

No, the pathetic attempts by the left to gain political capital from this are. Go look at his Youtube site. There is nothing political about this, guy, there is only lunacy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

timthesocialist:

" What the hell is with all the people on this page blaming this on leftists? Why would leftists attack leftists? "

Actually, leftists have attacked leftists as long as the left has existed. As for this guy, as recently as 2 days ago, the "Daily Kos" had a article wishing the congresswoman dead. So if you want to make it political, how about that?

In the event, the killer`s web page clearly shows that he was a nutcase, not a political activist. Check it out yourself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But I see some rejoicing in blaming all right-wingers just because I called him an extreme leftist based on his readings.

You quoted an excerpt about a right-winger's violence to condemn left-wingers. In your rush to blame the left, you made a mistake. Your refusal to fess up to it is disgusting.

I say people rejoice in death because they can't really be so stupid as to not see that this and many other acts could not have happened without guns being so prevalent. There comes a time when you have to assume the worst. Some pro-gun people rejoice in the death of others. Otherwise, they would demand more control.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm sensing both you guys on the right and left want this guy to be one of the other.... what do you gain by that?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Our lax laws allow guns to be sold then smuggled to Mexico

Then I guess it is our lax laws that allow marijuana cocaine to be smuggled in to America.

Guns are outlawed in Mexico, yet they had 13,000 drug related murders there. Guns are tightly controlled, just be on the border hunting and inadvertantly cross into Mexico and you will face jail time. But, the "bad guys" will get them. They can't buy them legally in the US, if you know what the rules are to buy guns. There is actually a case that the ACLU is fighting for, trying to allow a person who is not a US citizen to lawfully buy and own a gun. It seems the South Dakota laws state only US citizens can own firearms. So, its not all about the abundance of guns in America, it's about what types of people will use them, and in this case, just a bad egg used a gun.

By the way, read a report on Navy Times, that this guy tried to join the Army back in 2008, but he was rejected. Due to privacy act limitations they couldn't say, but I would take a guess that it probably had to do with mental instability.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

this and many other acts could not have happened without guns being so prevalent." Run, I would like to agree, but I've picked up a lot of victims in my short time as an ambulance driver who were chopped up, bludgeoned by bats, chains, bottles, etc.. in fact, I'll go as far as saying that gun victims were the least. That was NYC, which "had" a strict gun law at that time. Additionally, I asked this question before, but why, why when all 50 states (pre 1970's) had NO gun laws and practically everyone had one in their homes, were gun crimes so few?

Now, may I ask either side, if this guys is proven to be of the left or the right, how are you going to react?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just scrolled through all the posts... man. What is it with you guys?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skip, as per my earlier post I do not believe he belongs to either side. Mikehuntz has also come around on that point.

I do not want him to be on either side either. What I want is for everyone to drop the violence and hate rhetoric and inability to compromise on gun issues, and I mean EVERYONE, but as I see conservatives being the most guilty of both doing those and tolerating those, I have to admit I have been using this guy to drive the point home, especially to conservatives, that those things must stop, and calm and fair debate must be embraced. When I am done with this guy I will toss him in the garbage heap where he belongs. He represents neither side, but I say again (and he may be an exception) that violent haters tend to gravitate toward conservativism and conservatives need to clean house on that score. I suggest starting with Rush Limbaugh, Beck and Ann Coulter. Does the left have anyone to match their hype and anger? Thing is, anger does not stay locked on one side or the other. You get angry and the other side just gets angry right back. Anger is like a disease, and conservatives got it the worst.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm sensing both you guys on the right and left want this guy to be one of the other.... what do you gain by that?

That's just the way politics is these days - seize the moral high ground and seek to discredit your opponents as extremists. Quite frankly, the Left are experts at this. They have been branding their political opponents as racists, sexist, greedy, and hate-mongers for decades all for the purposes of changing the subject from defending an ideology that looks good on paper but always fails when put into practice. The media then pick up on the Lefts attacks and turn a tragic crime perpetrated by a lunatic into a political weapon.

Why do they do it? Well, it works! Watch the news over the next several weeks and months and see it unfold - happens every time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

in fact, I'll go as far as saying that gun victims were the least.

Skip, your personal experience is great and all, but stats prove that guns kill more people. People recover very poorly from being dead.

why when all 50 states (pre 1970's) had NO gun laws and practically everyone had one in their homes, were gun crimes so few?

I don't even know if your information is correct there. But since you believe it: If gun crimes rise, is your answer to do nothing? If a people had a sense of responsibility, then lost it, should all remain the same anyhow?

Now, may I ask either side, if this guys is proven to be of the left or the right, how are you going to react?

I will continue to deny that he belongs to either side, same as I say that violent Christians are not real Christians...and I am not Christian. Whatever books he reads or talk shows he listens to, whatever politicians he supports or political ideologies he believes in, he is a representative of none but nut-cases.

But, despite the above, if people gather together and brand him a rightist, I will continue to remind the right of how it feels to have people unfairly associated with you, by many means even if they appear to conflict with above (as WhiteHawk refuses to comprehend). I am sick of the punditry, and it usually seems to originate on the right. I don't want to fight fire with fire, but when goaded enough, I will.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Additionally, I asked this question before, but why, why when all 50 states (pre 1970's) had NO gun laws and practically everyone had one in their homes, were gun crimes so few?

I suspect it has more to do with the punishment and the way society dealt with lawbreakers, then anything else.

He represents neither side, but I say again (and he may be an exception) that violent haters tend to gravitate toward conservativism and conservatives need to clean house on that score. I suggest starting with Rush Limbaugh, Beck and Ann Coulter. Does the left have anyone to match their hype and anger?

You point out Limbaugh, Beck, and Coulter, and yet none of them call for killing people. They do talk about fighting those who disagree with them, but its in the political arena, the arena of ideas. Thats the difference between the right and left. The right is confident that if ideas are fairly presented, they will win. The left, as you so ably demonstrate, are desperate to silence those who disagree. Another thing is, the 3 you mention aren't really about hate. Contrast this with people you find posting on DailyKos, or HuffPost. Theres the real hate and vitriol. The difference of course, is platform. Limbaugh, Beck, and Coulter, and hell throw in Hannity as well. They have a platform from which to speak and be heard. But the reason they are heard, is because people are willing to listen. Part of that, is because they are first, entertainers, and second, because their message resonates with people. if their message was hate, hate, hate, that simply wouldn't work. And thats where you and so many others on the left, miss the boat. You are correct though in that this isn't a left/right issue. I said that several times before. This is a nutcase issue. Just as it was when that left-wing loon college professor went a shot up a bunch of people, or so many other examples of violence by those whose political affiliations happen to lean left.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphaape, the U.S. is not Mexico. I believe the U.S. actually has some power to enforce the laws it makes. If you are going to compare America to another country, Canada would a much better place. Lots of places are doing great with strict gun control and they are a lot closer the America than cartel heaven Mexico.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You point out Limbaugh, Beck, and Coulter, and yet none of them call for killing people.

They preach hate. Hate leads to killing. They use violent imagery and violent rhetoric. They do not encourage people to think or debate. They encourage anger and mindless cheering. And they attract violent people for what they say and how they say it. You just don't want to admit these things.

Moderator: Please tone down your rhetoric.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They preach hate. Hate leads to killing. They use violent imagery and violent rhetoric

I doubt runwith scissors has ever even watched or listened to Beck (hint - to enjoy the guy never forget he is nothing but an entertainer)or Coulter (she is no more outrageous than PJ O Rourke, but since she is a woman and she is white the Left feel ok unleashing the inner misogynist on her)or Limbaugh.

As the facts on this case emerge and confirm what his classmates said of the killer - "Leftwing pothead" - you can be sure the Official Narrative will change and like sudden jihad mass murdered Major Hassan or Omar Thornton ("I killed 5 racists") the guy will be portrayed as a victim who the system failed etc etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is from a rally promo on Sarah Palin's website:

"SATURDAY 06/12/10, 10:00 AM Get on Target for Victory in November Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly"

Let this day go down in history with April 14, 1865, November 22, 1963, April 4, 1968 and June 5, 1968. This was a political crime promoted by the right wing echo chamber, their own home brewed self-professed terrorist. Calling this anti-government loon a liberal shows how guilty the tea party conservatives are for their horrible and violent rhetoric.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let this day go down in history with April 14, 1865, November 22, 1963, April 4, 1968 and June 5, 1968.

john Wilkes Booth was a Democrat. He killed Lincoln, the first Republican the newly formed anti-slavery Republican party nominated.

Oswald was a Lefty. He lived in Russia. He left it because it wasn't radical enough.

MLK was a Republican.

Mr zurcronium - do you know ANYTHING about US history or poitics?

Since Rep Giffords is, thank God, still alive, the only political assassination you can speak of here is the judge - who was a Bush appointee, and therefore, a Republican.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You quoted an excerpt about a right-winger's violence to condemn left-wingers. In your rush to blame the left, you made a mistake. Your refusal to fess up to it is disgusting.

I admit I could be wrong. I don't think this guy was mentally competent now to differentiate between the two. He was just a paranoid pot smoker paranoid about government controlling people. People of this persuation usually are on the left of the spectrum. Sound familiar?

Skip, as per my earlier post I do not believe he belongs to either side. Mikehuntz has also come around on that point.

Thank you for at least understanding that. But why in your previous post did you say that I refuse to "fess up"? Are you confused?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hint - to enjoy the guy never forget he is nothing but an entertainer

Nuts cannot do that. Even just the low of IQ have extreme difficulty. I have watched and listened to Rush. He did make me laugh sometimes and he did have some good points sometimes, but overall he is just a trouble maker. I have seen Coulter in interviews and she is rabid and nutso. I know little of Beck. So you are half right about me not knowing all of them directly. But I have heard enough about them to know what is true. All I hear is much like the opinions I formed on my own about Rush. They are dangerous, irresponsible and their priorities are way out of whack. You can't just pass them off as entertainers because they have influence on both sides and they breed anger and violence too.

Now, did I just say I want the plug pulled on them? No I did not. But experience tells me people jump to that conclusion. What I want is for to wake up, start thinking and stop yelling "hoo-rah" and "woot, woot, woot!" Now, I know that lefties do the same thing on Phil Donahue but the reasons are very very different. Rush and his ilk go on and on like our country was at war or something and he fires up the idiots. Same with the others. But other conservatives are very very slow to denounce them, suggestively slow.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But why in your previous post did you say that I refuse to "fess up"? Are you confused?

Not at all. Your coming around to the fact that the gunman is representative of neither party and your error of blaming a right-winger's violence on a left-winger are two totally separate points. I can only hope you will hold back on your blame the left tendencies anyway (something we can blame Rush Limbaugh for popularizing FYI).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@whitehawk

Though I appreciate your long diatribe about media bias, are we done now pretending that the symbols on Palins map are surveyor symbols?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The media then pick up on the Lefts attacks and turn a tragic crime perpetrated by a lunatic into a political weapon.

Boy, that whole post! Very telling. If the political weapon in this case will calm the rhetoric in America, then I support it! If the political weapon in this case will convince gun advocates to do something and/or make compromises that prevent (yes prevent. Not end, but prevent) this kind of crime from happening again, then I support it!

Both the right and the left have had bad ideas. But why is it the bad ideas of the left tend to lead to loss of money and the bad ideas of the right to lead to loss of life?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

runwith scissors : "But I have heard enough about them to know what is true. All I hear is much like the opinions I formed on my own about Rush. They are dangerous, irresponsible and their priorities are way out of whack."

But why is it you can only speak in generalities? What has Limbaugh said that is dangerous?And I mean precisely. The shooter listed the Communist Manifesto as some of his favorite reading.Doesn't sound like a dittohead to me. ("Dittohead" is American slang for a Limbaugh listener.)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's too funny. Like you add a huge voting bloc to a party and not change the party. Now that's naive.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Your coming around to the fact that the gunman is representative of neither party and your error of blaming a right-winger's violence on a left-winger are two totally separate points.

Really how can you say "representative of neither party" and "blaming a right-winger's violence on a left-winger"? You really are contradicting yourself here. Please go back and reread all your ranting previously. You want me to say it wasn't a lefty but you are determined to paint him a righty. So when will you be coming around on your confusion?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

latest reports say the shooter met Giffords back in 2007. (Hmmm, that would be a full year before Sarah Palin was on the nat'l scene...) and he reportedly told class mates Giffords was ‘stupid and unintelligent.’

Giffords is Jewish

Shooter also listed Mein Kampf as among his favorite books...

...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What has Limbaugh said that is dangerous?And I mean precisely.

My complaint was the general tone. Limbaugh is a snake who uses pieces of specifics to create that general tone. I am not going to try to piece specifics together to make you understand something that is readily apparent just by watching Limbaugh. (About as specific as I can be is being pro-war and pro-execution. Both are slippery slopes).

Besides, I don't know if it was agreement with those rabid pundits that set him off or disagreement. All I know is that anger and violent rhetoric spread like a disease. I also know that a "wooting" audience does not think deeply enough to make a proper decision about anything, and that is infuriating in itself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

All I said was designed to get you to drop this guilt by association nonsense.

So, rather like associating Limbaugh and the rest with this nonsense? Why are you so opposed to free speech? They aren't going out and demanding their listeners engage in anything apart from maybe writing their congressmen, and voting. Oh, the horror. People are free to listen to whomever they want. The trouble is, when the lefties speak, nobody listens.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There you go Molenir. I said quite clearly I was not for pulling the plug on these guys, yet you accuse me of being against free speech. What I am against is careless listening. Those political hacks only have shows because people listen to their crap and accept their brainwashing. People seem to have lost all sense and taste in America. But I won't hold my breath waiting for an apology! Me! Against free speech! What an absolute joke!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I said quite clearly I was not for pulling the plug on these guys, yet you accuse me of being against free speech. What I am against is careless listening.

So, you say they are the problem and to solve this problem we should start by dealing with them. How precisely do you think we should deal with them? A radio network to give an opposing pov, tried and failed, no one listened to it. Are you suggesting the government should force people to listen to something? Whats your solution? Careless listening? People have a right to their opinions, and a right to listen to those they wish to. What you are suggesting is in opposition to freedom of speech. So many on the left claim they are in favor of freedom of speech, and then like yourself, claim that people they disagree with, essentially should be silenced, someway or another.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They preach hate. Hate leads to killing. They use violent imagery and violent rhetoric. They do not encourage people to think or debate. They encourage anger and mindless cheering. And they attract violent people for what they say and how they say it. You just don't want to admit these things.

@runwithscissors: you make this complaint about those on the right, but looking at a recent story the left-leaning blog Daily Kos was swift to scrub its post from a Tucson writer explaining how the congresswoman was now "dead to me."

One of the blog's diary writers, identifying himself as BoyBlue, had written a post only two days before the shooting titled "My CongressWOMAN voted against Nancy Pelosi! And is now DEAD to me!"

To add more, Marko Moulitsas (founder of Daily Kos), had also posted what he called a "target list" (the same type that they say Palin had made and caught all of the bad press from) identifying Giffords. In a 2008 Daily Kos post, Moulitsas listed Giffords as one of dozens of representatives with "a bull's-eye on their district" for being a "bad apple" Democrat.

So tell me which group is it that keeps hyping about doing bad things to the other group?

I believe that there should be debate among the political parties, that way people can get more than one side of the issues. But I don't think that you should use violence to get your point across.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir

You point out Limbaugh, Beck, and Coulter, and yet none of them call for killing people. They do talk about fighting those who disagree with them,

Wrong. Beck joked about killing Michael Moore. Research it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Go look at his Youtube site. There is nothing political about this, guy, there is only lunacy.

As Lizz correctly points out above, his rants on YouTube don't stem from his imagination; they come from various radical right-wing fringe figures.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Look guys, the 'crazy guy breaking out a firearm and shooting people up' scenario repeated ad naseum in the states has become such a common occurence that to say guns aren't a very basic part of the equation is just ridiculous.

Regarding this specific incident, if you bothered to do a little research you'd find the anti-Giffords campaign built up by the Right had gotten to the point where ex-Marine Republican challenger Jesse Kelly "held fundraisers where he urged supporters to help remove Giffords from office by joining him to shoot a fully loaded M16 rifle."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

chotto:

The logic that "I need a gun to defend myself incase someone uses one on me" is compltely flawed logic. How on earth do you use a gun in "self defence"? Sharp-shoot a bullet into their wrist and disarm them from whatever weapon they might be carrying?

Have you ever read my postings about the time someone tried to mug me? Long story short, I used my gun in self-defense successfully, and didn't even have to fire it, as is the case with many (if not most) incidents of armed self-defense in America.

The fact that anyone has the right to own a gun is an unfortunate, out-dated law.

No, self-defense is a basic human right. Probably the most basic and important one of all. Guns have been proven to be effective tools for self-defense many times. Just look for a website titled "The Armed Citizen". Hundreds of reports on there.

Believe it or not, you do NOT need guns to function as a society and keep law and order.

That depends greatly on the society.

And the above article is a classic case of why the public should not be allowed anywhere near a firearm, let alone OWN one.

So only the authorities (police and military) should have guns? Oh yeah, that worked great in 1930's Germany. /sarcasm

timthesocialist:

What the hell is with all the people on this page blaming this on leftists? Why would leftists attack leftists? You people are idiots.The guy who did this is a right wing radical. To blame this on the left after all the violent rhetoric from tea party hacks.

You really should try reading threads before posting on them. You were debunked before you ever typed a letter.

Giffords is not a Leftist, she is a moderate, "blue dog" Democrat and former Republican. The federal judge killed in this was a Republican appointed by president George W. Bush. Two of the shooter's favorite books were The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf, regular favorites of Left-wing anarchists. There have also been statements from multiple school friends of his that he is a radical Leftist.

skipthesong:

I'm sensing both you guys on the right and left want this guy to be one of the other.... what do you gain by that?

No, I'm just fed up with Leftists reflexively blaming everything violent on the Right, when Lee Harvey Oswald, Bill Ayers and the rest of his Weather Underground gang, Lynnette "Squeaky" Fromme, The Black Panthers, the Earth Liberation Front, John Wilkes Booth, Leon Frank Czolgosz, Sirhan Sirhan, Jim Jones, the Symbionese Liberation Army, and James Wenneker von Brunn were either left-leaning or full-blown radical Leftists with a capital "L". And that's only the short list! There's also Clay Duke, Joe Stack, David Guy McKay, Bradley Neal Crowder, the SEIU things who beat Kenneth Gladney, all the Leftists who committed acts of violence against those attending the 2008 Republican convention, etc., etc., etc.

Zurcronium:

Let this day go down in history with April 14, 1865, November 22, 1963, April 4, 1968 and June 5, 1968. This was a political crime promoted by the right wing echo chamber, their own home brewed self-professed terrorist.

You really should read threads before posting on them.

Calling this anti-government loon a liberal shows how guilty the tea party conservatives are for their horrible and violent rhetoric.

It's his own friends calling him a Leftist. Seriously, do you read anything but Kos?

Junnama:

Though I appreciate your long diatribe about media bias, are we done now pretending that the symbols on Palins map are surveyor symbols?

I never pretended anything about the symbols, just pointing out that sailwind was technically correct.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

runwithscissors:

He represents neither side, but I say again (and he may be an exception) that violent haters tend to gravitate toward conservativism and conservatives need to clean house on that score. I suggest starting with Rush Limbaugh, Beck and Ann Coulter.

What do any of them have to do with violent rhetoric? Limbaugh?!? Oh I see, you're just projecting your hatred. You hate them, so they must promote hate. Riiiiiight.

Does the left have anyone to match their hype and anger?

“They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”

“Get in Their Faces!”

“I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”

“Hit Back Twice As Hard”

Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”

“It’s time to fight for it.”

“Punish your enemies.”

“I’m itching for a fight.”

...and that's just Barack Obama.

Anger is like a disease, and conservatives got it the worst.

Project much?

They preach hate. Hate leads to killing. They use violent imagery and violent rhetoric. They do not encourage people to think or debate. They encourage anger and mindless cheering. And they attract violent people for what they say and how they say it.

Evidence? Or am I going to have to just take your word for it?

Nuts cannot do that. Even just the low of IQ have extreme difficulty.

Which probably explains your hatred of him, and others in his line of work. ;)

But I have heard enough about them to know what is true.

HAHAHAHAHA!!! "I've heard my fellow Leftists rant about them so that's just as good as listening to them." I repeat: HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Now, I know that lefties do the same thing on Phil Donahue but the reasons are very very different.

Phil Donahue? They must be easily rallied then. Phil makes me sleepy.

But why is it the bad ideas of the left tend to lead to loss of money and the bad ideas of the right to lead to loss of life?

You must be too young to remember Truman's war in Korea, and Kennedy's (and later Johnson's) war in Vietnam.

My complaint was the general tone. Limbaugh is a snake who uses pieces of specifics to create that general tone. I am not going to try to piece specifics together to make you understand something that is readily apparent just by watching Limbaugh. (About as specific as I can be is being pro-war and pro-execution. Both are slippery slopes).

Then you fail. I've listened to Limbaugh, read columns by Coulter (very funny stuff, if a bit snarky) and both listened to and watched Beck (he might be as crazy and/or as paranoid as Olbermann, but nowhere near as angry as MSNBC's star attraction). I've never seen any calls or even suggestions for violence. Can you say the same for the "church" Obama attended for 20 years?

Besides, I don't know if it was agreement with those rabid pundits that set him off or disagreement.

It has to be one or the other? And what about his agreement or disagreement with the rabid punditry of Olbermann or DailyKos? Myopia much?

Say, what if this nutter never listened to Limbaugh, Beck or Coulter? That would kinda mess up your theory, huh?

All I know is that anger and violent rhetoric spread like a disease.

And apparently, all you know is that anger and violent rhetoric only exist on the right, because you so consistently and willfully ignore the anger and violent rhetoric on the left.

For the record, I suspect the nutcase shooter didn't commit this atrocity because he was a Leftist, but rather because he's nuts. But he might have been more prone to violence thanks to his Leftist leanings. The Left has no room whatsoever trying to claim that right-of-center folks are more prone to violence when the long record of history proves just the opposite. Maybe one day you'll learn to accept that, runwithscissors.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

how about this, why don't we all wait for the investigation's outcome?

This left and right thing is really starting to annoy me. And regardless if he's left or right, he's going go in one direction - death!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

he's going go in one direction - death!

I think we are all headed in that direction, he might just got an Express Ticket.

Fully agree, lets wait. So far I don't think he has spoken and claimed the 5th..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He had contact with her in 2007.. this guy could have been a stalker, like the guy who killed John Lennon?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Democrats couldn't wait to assault the Constitution further. report from CNN:

"Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pennsylvania, said he will introduce legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a Member of Congress or federal official."

When we reorder society because we imagine the discourse of ordinary democracy provokes violence in the mentally unstable it is we who have lost our marbles. Both sides use words like 'target', 'take out', 'take down' 'massacre' etc. The word 'campaign' itself also describes military ventures. Shame on these cowards.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reynolds got it right...

If you’re using this event to criticize the “rhetoric” of Sarah Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you’re either asserting a connection between the “rhetoric” and the shooting — which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie — or you’re not, in which case you’re just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. So which is it?

Based on the evidence as of RIGHT NOW, there is no third choice.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think many of you are skipping Arizona's gun laws which allow for concealed weapons. Perhaps time to change those now?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@whitehawk

Sailwind is not correct and it is comical to listen to. Can you even find that surveyors symbol anywhere? Is there a surveyor in the Palin inner circle? How many surveyors are the even in the country? Maybe 25,000 at most. Even if this is a surveyors symbol would someone expect anyone but a surveyor to know what it is?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Loki520:If you’re using this event to criticize the “rhetoric” of Sarah Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you’re either asserting a connection between the “rhetoric” and the shooting — which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie —

I saw Palin's web page with the crosshairs targetting Gifford. Gifford commented that it was potentialy dangerous, giving Palin plenty of time to respond. Palin responded, after Gifford was shot. Sometimes a child, or a child-like adult, can only learn by making a mistake. But apparently she learned, the hard way, and at least she deserves credit for that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just finished reading the 200 or so comments and I have to say, it was long and educational.

Now, the shooter was about a meter away from Giffords and she survived but six other people didn't? Including a judge? Was she really the target? Because from where I stand, there is little chance for someone who can kill six people and hurt so many more to not finish the deed. If she was indeed the main target, he would probably have shot her multiple times.

If he was that bad a killer, or that off target, then it seems to me that he would have had to have someone else shooting with him because that's a really, really large number of victims for someone alone.

If someone helped him, as mentioned in the article, then he is not, by definition, a lone nut.

a pot-smoking loner

That description fits a heck of a lot of teenagers and young adults I know...

denounced the attack as a horrific

Moderator, you don't need "a" in this sentence. Cheers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lunatics and fanatics abound in this world. They always find a way to torture us. So long as there are people there will be incidents like this. Accept it and move on with life.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I saw Palin's web page with the crosshairs targetting Gifford. Gifford commented that it was potentialy dangerous, giving Palin plenty of time to respond. Palin responded, after Gifford was shot. Sometimes a child, or a child-like adult, can only learn by making a mistake. But apparently she learned, the hard way, and at least she deserves credit for that.

Did you see the Daily Kos Webpage targetting Giffords as a bad apple Dem? Care to comment on that? Have the Dems learned their lesson as well?

Now, the shooter was about a meter away from Giffords and she survived but six other people didn't? Including a judge? Was she really the target? Because from where I stand, there is little chance for someone who can kill six people and hurt so many more to not finish the deed. If she was indeed the main target, he would probably have shot her multiple times.

I don't really think so. Or rather she was, but not because of something she did or said, but rather who she was, and where she was. As in, I think the nut wanted to create a splash, knew his congresswoman was there, shot her, and kept shooting, trying to cause as much havoc as possible.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@whitehawk

Sailwind is not correct and it is comical to listen to. Can you even find that surveyors symbol anywhere? Is there a surveyor in the Palin inner circle? How many surveyors are the even in the country? Maybe 25,000 at most. Even if this is a surveyors symbol would someone expect anyone but a surveyor to know what it is?

I find nothing "comical" about cross-hairs shown in a gun-scope, and I do not find anything "comical" in Palin's use of cross-hairs in a survey'ors scope........What I do what is objective reporting, her symbol used on the map was not a gun-scope it is what it is..... A location point on a plat map.....Media never reported that aspect of use of the symbol, doesn't fit the meme.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Is there a surveyor in the Palin inner circle? How many surveyors are the even in the country? Maybe 25,000 at most. Even if this is a surveyors symbol would someone expect anyone but a surveyor to know what it is?

Just one really silly comment on this.... I think Palin as Gov of Alaska would know quite a bit about surveyor'in and the mining and tools involved for natural resources...It's why we bought the area from the Russian's back in the day in the first place.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you don't find it comical why do you continue to support a position so ridiculous. Please by all means answer these questions:

Can you even find that surveyors symbol anywhere? Is there a surveyor in the Palin inner circle? How many surveyors are the even in the country? Maybe 25,000 at most. Even if this is a surveyors symbol would someone expect anyone but a surveyor to know what it is? Even if this is a surveyor's symbol who would include it on a map knowing that it looks like a gun-scope and would only be recognizable as not being one by a tiny handful of people (surveyors)?

There are no answers for these questions, because the position is ridiculous. Better for you guys to stick to pointing out the dems using similar imagery. At least that's not incredibly stupid.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Here's another good one: Let me guess in surveying when you've finished the sight it becomes red right? I mean a red colored has a different meaning in surveying right? Oh wait, no, that's not true.... Oh then whey would they do that?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Welcome to tea party America.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

White Hawk

Have you ever read my postings about the time someone tried to mug me? Long story short, I used my gun in self-defense successfully, and didn't even have to fire it, as is the case with many (if not most) incidents of armed self-defense in America.

That nutjob was armed with a gun, too?

Just look for a website titled "The Armed Citizen". Hundreds of reports on there.

A nice, neutral website you've pointed out there. Well done.

So only the authorities (police and military) should have guns?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This follow-on bit pretty much puts an end to the "gun sights vs. surveyor's symbols" distraction (quoted from "The Sun" (UK)):

The crosshairs were quickly taken off the website yesterday and Mrs Palin offered her "sincere condolences" to Mrss Giffords and the other shooting victims.

Rebecca Mansour, a member of Mrs Palin's team, said the crosshairs were never intended to be gun sights.

She told a radio show: "It was simply crosshairs like you'd see on maps. It never occurred to us that anybody would consider it violent."

A couple of things on this... I've never seen "crosshairs" on maps until I saw Palin's map of the U.S. She used white crosshairs for ones still being targeted and changed the crosshairs to red (blood-red? You be the judge) for the targets she considered successfully defeated. Now she's removed the crosshairs altogether. Why would she do that if it wasn't intended to represent crosshair targeting? She may have used a surveyor's character from a font, but it appears that's only because of its close resemblence to the view from a rifle scope.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

" I think Palin as Gov of Alaska would know quite a bit about surveyor'in and the mining and tools involved for natural resources..."

Heh, maybe "Sarah" can see a surveryor's office from her house, neh sail!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313 - Welcome to tea party America.

Interesting and shameful comment. There has been NO evidence that this deranged lunitic belong to or sympathized with any of the various Tea Parties.

Many people knew for some time that this nutcase was dangerous and threatening but no one did anything about that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"deranged lunitic belong to or sympathized with any of the various Tea Parties"

Some people consider deranged loonies in the tea party using cross-hairs on their website as shameful.

The fact Palin's team removed them immediately says it all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

runwithscissors:

Me! Against free speech! What an absolute joke!

Er...

runwithscissors at 03:11 PM JST - 9th January

Smack him for shouting "LEFTY", not me for trying to shut him down.

skipthesong:

And regardless if he's left or right, he's going go in one direction - death!

True, but first he has to be found mentally competent to stand trial, and then found guilty when he'll likely use an insanity defense.

Junnama:

Sailwind is not correct and it is comical to listen to. Can you even find that surveyors symbol anywhere? Is there a surveyor in the Palin inner circle? How many surveyors are the even in the country? Maybe 25,000 at most. Even if this is a surveyors symbol would someone expect anyone but a surveyor to know what it is?

Still trying to win a point, no matter how trivial, eh? I grant you that most people won't know a surveyor's symbol when they see one. But they certainly know a bullseye when they see one. Like the bullseyes used on multiple DNC campaign maps, DailyKos' pro-Democrat, anti-Republican campaign map, etc.

CraigHicks:

I saw Palin's web page with the crosshairs targetting Gifford.

You mean "targeting Gifford's district", right? The one I saw didn't have a picture of Giffords herself (or anyone else) in the crosshairs.

And it still doesn't make a connection to this shooter.

PeaceWarrior"

Now, the shooter was about a meter away from Giffords and she survived but six other people didn't? Including a judge? Was she really the target? Because from where I stand, there is little chance for someone who can kill six people and hurt so many more to not finish the deed. If she was indeed the main target, he would probably have shot her multiple times.

Since his first shot resulted in a head wound, he probably considered her done. Most people don't survive head wounds.

Speaking of which, I wonder how the other wounded are doing. I haven't seen anything in the news about the conditions of the others, so does that mean that Giffrods is the only one in critical?

Lunatics and fanatics abound in this world. They always find a way to torture us. So long as there are people there will be incidents like this. Accept it and move on with life.

Indeed. Some people like to fool themselves into thinking that everything is preventable. But humans are complicated and can be quite random. The only genuine solution is to prepare yourself as best you can for life's randomness. But that's personal responsibility, which (again) some people are averse to.

Molenir:

Did you see the Daily Kos Webpage targetting Giffords as a bad apple Dem? Care to comment on that? Have the Dems learned their lesson as well?

Was that a rhetorical question? ;)

chotto:

That nutjob was armed with a gun, too?

No, just a strap that he put around my neck (he snuck up from behind me).

A nice, neutral website you've pointed out there. Well done.

Ah yes, complain about the source. There are no "neutral" sources. Everybody reports with the same view they see the world through. Doesn't matter if it's the AP, CNN, NPR, Fox, etc. It's just human nature. Which goes back to my previous "long diatribe" about media bias. The proof of guns having good uses doesn't fit the left-wing media's template, so it doesn't get reported. But that doesn't change the fact that guns are proven to be effective self-defense tools. Fortunately, we still have multiple news sources in the U.S.

Talking about clutching at straws.

You mean like trying to connect a Palin ad with a Leftist shooter?

Quick, I hear the King of England coming to your house. Blow someone's head off in self-defense. Yee hah.

Have you been into Loughner's pot stash?

Madverts:

Heh, maybe "Sarah" can see a surveryor's office from her house, neh sail!

Oh lookie, you can paraphrase Tina Fey!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Still trying to win a point, no matter how trivial, eh?

So we can put an end to this trivial point and agree they are gunsights?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts - Some people consider deranged loonies in the tea party using cross-hairs on their website as shameful.

The fact Palin's team removed them immediately says it all.

The fact that Palin has nothing to do with deranged lunitic says even more about the people who are attempting to blame her or the Tea Parties or everyone else except the lunitic. The political spin is un-credible.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh and I don't believe for one second there is a likely tangible link between Palin and this killer. Her response or her staff's response in coming up with this ridiculous "surveyors symbols" answer speaks volumes about her mindset and is not a trivial point.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So we can put an end to this trivial point and agree they are gunsights?

I'll agree that you consider everything that remotely resembles a gunsight to be a gunsight even if proven otherwise. You've never looked through a gunsight before, have you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For runwithscissors, who continues to incorrectly believe that right-of-center people are more prone to violence than left-of-center people, Michelle Malkin has a quite long list of evidence of the violent history of the modern American Left on her blog. It's quite a list, especially considering it only covers the past ten years. Just imagine if she had kept listing back to the 60's?

michellemalkin /2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whitehawk,

And michelle malkin is quite the instrument of hate herself. Creepy if you ask me.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But anyway, we've seen what a bastion of conservative crazy has to say on the sarah palin matter, what about those liberal nutters at the U.S. Secret Service. What did they have to say?

sarah palin's attacks on Barack Obama's patriotism provoked a spike in death threats against the future president, Secret Service agents revealed during the final weeks of the campaign.

The Republican vice presidential candidate attracted criticism for accusing Mr Obama of "palling around with terrorists", citing his association with the sixties radical William Ayers. The attacks provoked a near lynch mob atmosphere at her rallies, with supporters yelling "terrorist" and "kill him" until the McCain campaign ordered her to tone down the rhetoric. But it has now emerged that her demagogic tone may have unintentionally encouraged white supremacists to go even further. The Secret Service warned the Obama family in mid October that they had seen a dramatic increase in the number of threats against the Democratic candidate, coinciding with Mrs Palin's attacks. Michelle Obama, the future First Lady, was so upset that she turned to her friend and campaign adviser Valerie Jarrett and said: "Why would they try to make people hate us?"

That sarah palin. What a swell gal.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Add a Comment to Arizona Rep Giffords shot, 6 killed, including judge, 9-year-old girl

I repeat, welcome to tea party America.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WhiteHawk

But that doesn't change the fact that guns are proven to be effective self-defense tools.

Why stop at owning guns? Why not let everyone own grenades, nuclear warheads and fighter jets so they can 'defend' themselves? Not a bad idea eh? Then if one nutjob decides to nuke somewhere, the rest of you can go "oh, he was an exception".

Fortunately, we still have multiple news sources in the U.S.

Fox news isn't a credible source. In fact, there's hardly any 'real' journalism. I don't mean "left-wing" either.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well Taka, surely the radical left made more death threats on Dubya? I mean he did piss them off a whole lot. I'd'like to see some Secret Service stats on that...

I wrote just after the first reports of this tragedy that hopefully this could be a catalyst to end the frightening tried of ridiculous US politics only it seems to have polarized people even more.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So we can put an end to this trivial point and agree they are gunsights?

Does it matter? If I decide to do everything I can to bring down my congressman, and have a picture of him, in target sights, am I inciting violence, or making it obvious that my goal is to see him defeated? If you think I'm inciting violence, then I have to say, you're obviously an imbecile, although calling you that is really an insult to the intelligence of imbeciles everywhere.

And michelle malkin is quite the instrument of hate herself. Creepy if you ask me.

Yes, taking the time and trouble to point out the many, many examples of left wing hate, is quite evil. Truly. After all, anyone who dares to point out that nearly all the violence, and hate speech is coming from the left, and then actually cites examples to prove it, well thats just as evil as can be. The funny thing is, that if you look back over the posts in this and other threads you can see it. Very nearly all the hate speech, is directed towards conservatives. All those saying that people like Limbaugh etc should be removed, is coming from the left. The right isn't going around demanding people be taken off the air, or have their freedom of speech revoked. Thats a left wing thing. Hell, thats what the communists stand for.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The right isn't going around demanding people be taken off the air, or have their freedom of speech revoked.

I seem to remember that there was a lot of people who wanted Dixie Chicks removed from the airwaves for questioning the president. Since there are no really statistics, I would hazard a guess that both sides are equally as hatefully, childish and quick to point the finger. It's the old chicken before the egg agrument. If it wasn't taken so serious by some (like the gunman possible did), it would be funny in a satirical sense of haha. This shooting and commentary that has followed, has turned into a sad testiment of what partisan politics is like.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I repeat, welcome to tea party America.

Speaking as (as I've mentioned before) a bemused Brit with no axe to grind, I'd like to know how the shooting of centre-left politician by a radical left gunman has anything to do with the Tea Party.

I vehemently disgree with the American right on a number of issues, most noteably gun control and health care. But I could never nail my colours to the mast of the Americal 'Liberals', since they seem to think that brazen lies, underhand smears, loutish behaviour and grievous insults are a good substitute for informed debate.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I seem to remember that there was a lot of people who wanted Dixie Chicks removed from the airwaves for questioning the president. Since there are no really statistics, I would hazard a guess that both sides are equally as hatefully, childish and quick to point the finger.

There is a significant difference. See, people weren't demanding the government step in, and take a band they didn't like off the air. No, they called their radio station, and said, if you play them, we won't listen. They called their advertisers and said, if you support these radio stations, we won't buy your product. That to me is perfectly acceptable. I have no problem with this at all. Its everyones right to boycott what they don't approve of. Left or right. However when you start demanding people be removed from the air, by means of government intervention, doing so with the sole purpose of silencing those you disagree with, that is very, very different. That goes against the very thing they claim to support. In other words, the left believes in freedom of speech for everyone, but only if you agree with them.

I could never nail my colours to the mast of the Americal 'Liberals', since they seem to think that brazen lies, underhand smears, loutish behaviour and grievous insults are a good substitute for informed debate.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Intersting how everyone wants to blame the "right" or the "left"....how about we just blame the nutcase that did this horrific deed? The guy was, actually, an anarchist and mentally unstable, with political ties to nobody but his own ideology. And per the "gun 'control'" thingy? Remember that Nagasaki's mayor was gunned down not so long ago IN JAPAN, a country that has one of the most stringent gun control laws in the world.

As far as Michelle Malkin and hate: Ariana Huffington is the liberal mirror image of Ms. Malkin (if Ms. Malkin realyl is a purveyor of hate, which she isn't). Let's stop the name calling and simply deal with the facts, shall we?

For those who have lost loved ones in this tragedy, and those who are hurting, including Rep. Giffords, I've been praying ever since this thing went down. God have mercy on the soul and life of the shooter, Jared Lee Loughner...but may justice also prevail...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry, but it is somethng I have to ask - - - ppl keep saying,trying to say, Sarah Palin must bear some repsonsibity for the deaths here because Giffords district was one of many with (supposedly) a bullseye on it. Giffords is alive and responsive to verbal commands from her doc, the only dead political figure was a Bush appointee, a republican. Trying to stick this on the Tea Party is cheap shot blood libel politics.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yes, taking the time and trouble to point out the many, many examples of left wing hate, is quite evil. Truly. After all, anyone who dares to point out that nearly all the violence, and hate speech is coming from the left, and then actually cites examples to prove it, well thats just as evil as can be. The funny thing is, that if you look back over the posts in this and other threads you can see it. Very nearly all the hate speech, is directed towards conservatives. All those saying that people like Limbaugh etc should be removed, is coming from the left. The right isn't going around demanding people be taken off the air, or have their freedom of speech revoked. Thats a left wing thing. Hell, thats what the communists stand for.

Please turn off the hyperbole. If you don't think michelle malkin isn't guitly of extremely radical rhetoric, you're blind. She's a vitriol-fueled troll, that one.

Deal with it.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Very nearly all the hate speech, is directed towards conservatives. All those saying that people like Limbaugh etc should be removed, is coming from the left. The right isn't going around demanding people be taken off the air, or have their freedom of speech revoked.

Wow, you right-wingers do live on another world. Fox news, or RadioRwanda as I call it, has been calling for violence against liberals for a long time. Glenn Beck aroused so much hate against the Tides foundation, that a loon went out there and shot at the place. Hannity inspired a right-winger to shoot up a liberal church. There have been a LOT of right wingers who have urged their constituents to use their second amendment rights to get the backward change that they want. People have urged these right-wingers who stir up hate and violence OFF the air because they are toxic, and should bear some responsibility for their hate. Much like holding a bar responsible for getting a guy drunk and allowing him to drive off in a car. Waiting for the news that this guy followed Glenn Beck. From the sounds of it *right wing stuff about currency, it sounds just the marching orders came from him. This might bring about some nice change if this is attributed to him!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is a significant difference. See, people weren't demanding the government step in, and take a band they didn't like off the air. No, they called their radio station, and said, if you play them, we won't listen. They called their advertisers and said, if you support these radio stations, we won't buy your product. That to me is perfectly acceptable.

You are being selective with your memory, Molenir. I lived in the South at the time and there were PLENTY of people saying they committed treason and should be arrested, as they were supporting the enemy in a time of war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Please turn off the hyperbole. If you don't think michelle malkin isn't guitly of extremely radical rhetoric, you're blind.

Sad commentary when a blind man insists that because he can't see, no one else can either.

You are being selective with your memory, Molenir. I lived in the South at the time and there were PLENTY of people saying they committed treason and should be arrested, as they were supporting the enemy in a time of war.

lol, and those are what we refer to as, nuts. They were wrong, and so are those who call for censorship of people like Hannity and Limbaugh.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good_Jorb - I seem to remember that there was a lot of people who wanted Dixie Chicks removed from the airwaves for questioning the president.

The Dixie Chicks lived in the world of "entertainment". Their fans made them rich. That popularity went to their heads. When the Dixie Chicks attacked the President and then began insulting their own fan base, the fans stopped spending their money for Dixie Chick "stuff" and threatened to stop listening to stations that played Dixie Chick music. Simple economics carried the day - no fans = no money = no singing group.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

One thing we seem to be forgetting in trying to blame either the left or the right, we need to look at the person himself.

This guy was some sort of weird maniac. Looking at the NY Daily News, you can see pictures of his skull temple. The guy was just some loser Devil worshiping pot smoking maniac.

I think the US government should spend more time looking at kooks like this than trying to blame either party.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

One thing we seem to be forgetting in trying to blame either the left or the right, we need to look at the person himself.

Completely agree. People who want to blame Palin, or Bachmann, or for that matter the Dems at the Daily Kos are idiots. This isn't about politics, its about a psycho. If he was a hardcore Republican nutcase, it wouldn't change a thing, same if he was a left wing loon. The fact would remain that regardless of this idiots politics, the guy chose on his own to do an irrational act. Something that he is roundly condemned for by everyone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

lol, and those are what we refer to as, nuts. They were wrong, and so are those who call for censorship of people like Hannity and Limbaugh.

Oh, of course. There are quite a few nuts with talk shows, too.

I'm actually quite disappointed that the discussion about this tragedy (not just here, the discussion in general) has focused on the issue of political influence when it seems awfully clear this is not a case of political violence but an act of a deranged individual. There is a separate discussion to be had about the state of political 'discourse' in the US - which is as low quality and vitriolic (on all sides) now as any time I can remember - but I just don't think it's very relevant to this story.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

One thing we seem to be forgetting in trying to blame either the left or the right, we need to look at the person himself.

Yeah, but if we do that how can we make ourselves feel superior to those that disagree with us and discredit their motives as evil and dangerous? I mean, isn't the the point of many of the previous 200+ comments?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@whitehawk

I have looked down many a gunsight in my day. I've also read many a map in my day. You see it came from those years in the RA.

That's all beside the point. Why not respond with a degree of seriousness and responsibility. Sarah Palin is an influential person. Influence=responsibility. This lack of seriousness in her response either says she's just not responsible with her influence or she favors the results.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'll be somewhat surprised if this boy even goes to trial for murder and the other related charges. From what I've been given so far, he was nutz well before anyone here outside of Alaska even heard of 'Sarah Palin'.

Police removed him from college classrooms on four or five occasions. He'd written strange letters to politicos. Years ago he was asking incoherent questions of political candidates (including Gabrielle) in public forums. He accused the government on his social networking page of trying to control 'grammar'. Because he made no direct threats against any invidual(s) that I'm aware of as of this moment, he wasn't adjudged and remanded for a psyche eval. I don't see this boyo bein' convicted of any crimes... again with the little I know now.

Since Fox is blamed by the left as they always are, they ran some good video segments on Democrat politicians using real firearms to actually shoot at lawful political documents they were 'targeting'. They played some good stuff on those two top nutters over at MSNBC who graphically described how they wanted some specific names on the right to die... pretty creative if I came up with it as a joke among buds but downright sick when advocated by faux TV 'news commentators/journalists' on national and worldwide cable.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As an aside: another lone nut, huh? It's always lone nuts who do these killings (except Leo Ryan, I guess). Why are politicians always killed by lone nuts? Even going back to Garfield or McKinley..,

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Junnama, Oswald who killed Kennedy was a committed communist... the guy who killed either Garfield or McKinnley was a committed European anarchist... Most of those 'lone nuts' have political philosophies which are protected under American law unless they choose to violently act upon them. If someone says they're a Marxist, the very definition means violent overthrow of a standing government... 'course they gotta put their money where their mouths are before we can stick a needle in their arms.

As far as I know so far, the guy we're talkin' about today has no coherent political philosophy, and outside of throwin' some temper tandrums in class, posed no immediate and specific danger to anyone before Saturday mornin'.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's all beside the point. Why not respond with a degree of seriousness and responsibility. Sarah Palin is an influential person. Influence=responsibility. This lack of seriousness in her response either says she's just not responsible with her influence or she favors the results.

Your attempting to point the finger of blame at someone else, say a lot about you. I wonder, if Obama's campaign put out a similar map with gun sights targeting vulnerable Republican districts, would he be to blame? Why are you so desperate to blame someone other then the guilty party? The guy could have had an entire wall devoted to Palin, all her books, copies of all her speeches etc, and it still wouldn't have been her fault that this idiot decided to go and commit murder. Try to keep things in perspective here. The only one to blame, is the person who pulled the trigger.

As an aside: another lone nut, huh? It's always lone nuts who do these killings (except Leo Ryan, I guess). Why are politicians always killed by lone nuts? Even going back to Garfield or McKinley..,

Are you being serious? Its because almost without exception, when a guy goes nuts and decides to commit a violent act like this, he goes after someone visible. The more visible, yet easily accessible the better. This goes all the way back to Andrew Jackson, who survived an attempted assassination by a nutcase.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh yeah, for sure. I'm on the "lone" point. Why are these killings always done "lone" nut jobs?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

One question and it concerns the media. Why is it after the Ft Hood incident with Maj. Hassan, they wanted us to all be careful and not blame one particular religion and people and let's not be quick to rush judgement.

No the same media, will be quick to place this guy as a far right loon, and we don't hear any calls for let's not rush to judgement and be careful and analyze the person before we paint a picture of him.

Double standards I say.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@molenir

You're still missing the point. I don't believe it's her fault (unless concrete evidence points to it). Even if this turns into a smerdyakov case I wouldn't believe she's at fault.

However, why this ridiculous response? Does she think what happened is a joke, just to be flippantly blown off with some childish "surveyors symbol" excuse. Does anyone believe a frequent gun user doesn't think those look like gunsights? If Sarah Palin doesn't think this merits a serious response what does that say?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

i think the sheriff is covering his own arse. i think he missed the signals that the crazy killer gave and now he tries to incriminate talk show jocks or rising stars in the party he opposes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

not being american,id like someone to explain to me but is it true that the 2nd amendment says the people can run about shooting politicians if they dont like them? sorry for my ignorance on this.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

FlyingFish, yes, that's what it says basically. In a subparagraphg to the 2nd Amendment Thomas Jefferson is quoted as sayin' the life of the republic must be watered from time to time with the blood of politicians and undocumented gypsies. You can Google it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

All of you who are calling this guy a rightwing and trying to tie him to the Tea Party have not done your homework. His friends say he was a committed far left extremeist with mental problems.The problem with these people is not that they are left or right. The problem is they are far left or far right.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

thebone:

" The problem with these people is not that they are left or right. The problem is they are far left or far right. "

In the event, from his scribblings you can see that he was neither far left or far right, but simply insane.

However, the media and politicians have jumped on this to turn it into a political talking point (the evil republicans made him do it), which both an insult anybody´s intelligence, and extremely tacky.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Again,

Perhaps time for Arizona's gun laws to change. How about making concealed weapons illegal?

This may have been prevented if Arizona didn't have some of the most lax gun laws in the USA. Carrying a concealed weapon where a US Rep is going to be?

And that is a civilised nation? Come into the 21st Century.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even Tokugawa limited swords in Shogunate Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir, if you can't see michelle malkin for the hate-filled person she is, I just don't know what to say. But whatever, I'll leave you to your fantasies there.

Well, perhaps this guy WASN'T a tea partier. That isn't stopping the tea party from trying to cash in on him. YES, THE TEA PARTY IS USING THIS GUY AS A FUND RAISING TOOL!

Stay classy tea party.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This would make a really good JapanToday poll.

Do you think right-wing rhetoric inspires violent behavior?

1) Definitely

2) Possibly

3) No more than left-wing rhetoric

4) Not at all.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

However, why this ridiculous response? Does she think what happened is a joke, just to be flippantly blown off with some childish "surveyors symbol" excuse. Does anyone believe a frequent gun user doesn't think those look like gunsights? If Sarah Palin doesn't think this merits a serious response what does that say?

The answer is no. The allegation is ludicrous as well. Even bringing it up is foolish, so no, it doesn't merit any kind of serious response, it merits nothing but ridicule.

Do you think right-wing rhetoric inspires violent behavior?

Should have a left wing poll too. I know I'd choose possibly on that one, if only because all the violence seems to be coming from those the left. However, only possibly since I think its more the people on the left then the rhetoric that inspires bad behavior.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

if only because all the violence seems to be coming from those the left.

You remind me of the old song, Charlie Brown, "Why is everybody always picking on me? -Chorus- Charlie Brown (repeat twice) He's a clown, that Charlie Brown.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

if only because all the violence seems to be coming from those the left.

I love this argument. It's like the george bush defense argument. Except for that one time when he really dropped the ball, he kept us safe from terrorism.

Except for this one staring us in the face, all the violence (and voices in my head) are coming from the left.

Right. No specifics mind you like I provided. Nope, we just have to take your word and michelle malkin's word for it. I'll trust the Secret Service over that hate monger any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are ample quotes from prominent leftists advocating violence. They fill the pages of The Nation and even Newsweek; they can be found all over DailyKos and similar sites. Not all of us are as rabidly partisan as some who post on this subject. I read progressive and conservative stuff. You guys can't hide.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Right. No specifics mind you like I provided. Nope, we just have to take your word and michelle malkin's word for it. I'll trust the Secret Service over that hate monger any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

lol, thereby proving you never bothered to visit her site. Don't take her word for it, she provided links to articles, in some cases multiple links. Guess thats too much trouble to follow and find them out, and since your world view is that all the hate and violence is coming from the right, and the reality being that in fact almost all of it comes from the left, actually visiting her site, and following a few links would just destroy you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nope, we just have to take your word and michelle malkin's word for it.

Malkin is Filipino-American. Killer and victims were white people.

I'm just using the logic - or what passes for same - of the race-obsessed left...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@molenir

So an assassination attempt and the death of 6 people is not serious. Well enough, you need say no more.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Junnama:

" So an assassination attempt and the death of 6 people is not serious. Well enough, you need say no more. "

The liberal activists, beginning from the democratica party hack sheriff in charge are acting as it is not serious. While the blood was still on the ground, he stood there and went into a party political rant at the scene.

These guys simply see it as an excuse to smear their political opponients. Seldom have I seen such a tacky and cheap performance.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm not talking about these people. Activists are activists and biased speech is expected from them. Palin is an influential national figure. Don't you understand the difference?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313:

And michelle malkin is quite the instrument of hate herself. Creepy if you ask me.

Why, because you hate her? Or because she points out the immoral, unethical and/or criminal behavior of Leftist politicians? because she points out the hateful rhetoric and violence promoted and practised on the Left? I knew at least one of the regular JT Leftists would attack the source (oh, there's that rhetoric again) when I posted a Malkin link. Thanks for being predictable. I'll bet you didn't even follow the link to see the very, very, VERY long article. You probably just saw her name and thought to yourself: "Malkin? I hate that *** ****!" Speaking of hating Malkin, have you ever read her hate mail? Not only are Leftists hateful, threatening, racist bigots, they're also disgusting.

chotto:

Why stop at owning guns? Why not let everyone own grenades, nuclear warheads and fighter jets so they can 'defend' themselves? Not a bad idea eh? Then if one nutjob decides to nuke somewhere, the rest of you can go "oh, he was an exception".

Oh look, you found a strawman to play with! Have fun!

Madverts:

I wrote just after the first reports of this tragedy that hopefully this could be a catalyst to end the frightening tried of ridiculous US politics only it seems to have polarized people even more.

That probably could have been averted had Leftists not run to microphones within minutes - literally - of the shooting to blame Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. Within 20 minutes, news networks were referring to Sarah Palin's "target" ad. Not the DNC's or DailyKos' from the same election, only Palin's. Obsessive myopia anyone? Kos tweeted "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin". Markos Moulitas, the same creep who had his own "target" ad for Gifford's office. DailyKos, that same bastion of credibility where the Palin-birther conspiracy theory originated. Boehlert, Sullivan, several other Leftist tweeters and bloggers jumped on the groupthink gravy train as well. Within an hour, AZ Sen. Linda Lopez (D) went on Fox to blame the Tea Party and start the rumor that the shooter was an Afghan veteran. Hoping for the next McVeigh? (Except that McVeigh wasn't a right-winger either.)

Molenir:

If I decide to do everything I can to bring down my congressman, and have a picture of him, in target sights, am I inciting violence, or making it obvious that my goal is to see him defeated?

Speaking hypothetically? Because putting a generic sight symbol (as seen in gunsights, survey equipment, design software,etc.) on a map for a district is one thing, but putting a person's picture in the target of a gunsight is an implied threat. The former is what happened, but the Leftists are trying to make it sound like it was the latter.

taiko666:

Speaking as (as I've mentioned before) a bemused Brit with no axe to grind, I'd like to know how the shooting of centre-left politician by a radical left gunman has anything to do with the Tea Party.

Because the Left wants it to. Desperately.

I vehemently disgree with the American right on a number of issues, most noteably gun control and health care. But I could never nail my colours to the mast of the Americal 'Liberals', since they seem to think that brazen lies, underhand smears, loutish behaviour and grievous insults are a good substitute for informed debate.

I raise a pint of ale in salute to you, sir.

Taka313:

If you don't think michelle malkin isn't guitly of extremely radical rhetoric, you're blind.

Examples, please? And do be specific. Try to do a better job than runwithscissors.

She's a vitriol-fueled troll, that one.

As opposed to the JT Leftists who hate her so vehemently?

TheRat:

Fox news, or RadioRwanda as I call it, has been calling for violence against liberals for a long time.

Calling for violence? Telling people to go out and shoot up churches and whatnot? Really?

There have been a LOT of right wingers who have urged their constituents to use their second amendment rights to get the backward change that they want.

Examples, please? And do be specific. Try to do a better job than runwithscissors.

People have urged these right-wingers who stir up hate and violence OFF the air because they are toxic, and should bear some responsibility for their hate.

Did you ever hear Randi Rhoads' show on Air America? Well, not many people did, frankly. Still, she used a gunshot sound effect when talking about shooting then-president Bush. Alec Baldwin went on late-night TV and said people should raid the house of a Henry Hyde and kill him and his family. Sen. John Kerry suggested on Bill Maher's show that he should "have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone.”

But keep posting generalities about "right-wingers who stir up hate and violence", and I'll keep posting specific examples of Leftists doing exactly that.

Waiting for the news that this guy followed Glenn Beck.

Well you just keep waiting.

This might bring about some nice change if this is attributed to him!

That's just sick.

Junnama:

Why not respond with a degree of seriousness and responsibility. Sarah Palin is an influential person. Influence=responsibility. This lack of seriousness in her response either says she's just not responsible with her influence or she favors the results.

You seem to be ignoring the evidence that Sarah Palin didn't influence the nutcase/stoner shooter.

USARonin:

From what I've been given so far, he was nutz well before anyone here outside of Alaska even heard of 'Sarah Palin'.

Precisely. His obsession with Giffords predates anybody outside of Alaska hearing of Palin, predates the formation of the Tea Party, etc.

Because he made no direct threats against any invidual(s) that I'm aware of as of this moment, he wasn't adjudged and remanded for a psyche eval. I don't see this boyo bein' convicted of any crimes... again with the little I know now.

It's being reported now that he did make direct threats against a number of people in the area in recent years. School officials from his college, local politicians, etc. It turns out that Sheriff Dupnik (the same Democrat sheriff who refused to enforce Arizona's illegal immigration laws and who has been blaming "right-wing rhetoric" for the shooter's actions even though he admits he has no evidence to support that claim) had been convincing those targeted by Loughner not to file complaints. Interestingly, Loughner's mother works for the county too. Had Loughner been under a restraining order or charged with any crime of violence or threatening violence, he would not have been able to buy a gun legally. It just may turn out that the sheriff who is making political hay out of this could have prevented the whole thing by doing his job.

Junnama:

As an aside: another lone nut, huh? It's always lone nuts who do these killings (except Leo Ryan, I guess). Why are politicians always killed by lone nuts? Even going back to Garfield or McKinley..,

Yeah, no kidding. I suspect it's kind of difficult to be friends with a nutcase. Perhaps if we paid proper attention to loner nutcases...

Alphaape:

One question and it concerns the media. Why is it after the Ft Hood incident with Maj. Hassan, they wanted us to all be careful and not blame one particular religion and people and let's not be quick to rush judgement.

No the same media, will be quick to place this guy as a far right loon, and we don't hear any calls for let's not rush to judgement and be careful and analyze the person before we paint a picture of him.

Double standards I say.

You noticed that too, eh? Within hours, it was already known that he was shouting "Allah Akbar" while shooting our soldiers. Perhaps it reveals just who the Left is afraid of (Islamophobia, anyone?), and who they really consider their enemy.

Junnama:

Does anyone believe a frequent gun user doesn't think those look like gunsights?

I'm a frequent gun user and I thought they looked like AutoCAD symbols. But hey, that's just me. None of my handguns have scopes.

ikkochan:

Perhaps time for Arizona's gun laws to change. How about making concealed weapons illegal?

If that worked, Chicago and D.C. would be the safest cities in America. Instead, they are two of the most dangerous. And not by coincidence.

This may have been prevented if Arizona didn't have some of the most lax gun laws in the USA.

I suspect this has a lot more to do with a dangerous nutcase not being institutionalized like he should have been years ago.

Even Tokugawa limited swords in Shogunate Japan.

Wasn't that to prevent a coup against his rule?

Taka313:

Well, perhaps this guy WASN'T a tea partier. That isn't stopping the tea party from trying to cash in on him. YES, THE TEA PARTY IS USING THIS GUY AS A FUND RAISING TOOL!

How?

Except for this one staring us in the face, all the violence (and voices in my head) are coming from the left.

Still waiting for your proof that this happened because of anything the right has done.

No specifics mind you like I provided. Nope, we just have to take your word and michelle malkin's word for it.

Ah, so you didn't go to Malkin's site and see the incredibly long list of specific events (with videos, no less!). I figured as much.

Junnama:

I'm not talking about these people. Activists are activists and biased speech is expected from them. Palin is an influential national figure. Don't you understand the difference?

Obama is also an influential national figure, wouldn't you agree? Oh and look, he's the president! Maybe he should take the lead on this. And perhaps even lead by example, considering the heated and violent rhetoric he has used in recent years. (See my 05:21 PM post for the list.)

Moderator: Please tone down your rhetoric. And it is not necessary for you to reply to multiple posters, sentence by sentence. It makes your post too long.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

God bless America! Maybe if they bought more guns, they could take care of the problem better.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Once again I'll make it very clearly that American public is facing a serious problem with political discourse. It's not the matter of which parties have a long history of political violence--or whether Palin/Limbaugh/Beck is (are) responsible for instigating the public. What is clear to me is that individuals who have mental problems are prone to such incendiary rhetoric--regardless of left or right, Rep. or Dem. Folks trashing each other by harping on which is responsible for political violence, in this board are losing their marbles. Speaking of civility.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Rest assured Palin today told us she does not believe the tone of discourse is a problem at all. If so why not just say they were gunsights and be done with it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Junnama - Rest assured Palin today told us she does not believe the tone of discourse is a problem at all. If so why not just say they were gunsights and be done with it.

That's the job of Olberman, Matthews and Maddow and the people who repeat what they tell them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313:

" This would make a really good JapanToday poll. Do you think right-wing rhetoric inspires violent behavior? 1) Definitely 2) Possibly 3) No more than left-wing rhetoric 4) Not at all. "

From all that we know by now, clearly 4). This guy was so far removed from the normal world, neither right-wing nor left-wing propagand would have been relevant for him.

I find it shameful how one political side tries use this for smearing the other. To their credit, the other side has refrained from doing likewise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Rest assured Palin today told us she does not believe the tone of discourse is a problem at all. If so why not just say they were gunsights and be done with it.

Contrary to her belief, her opinion does not assure us the stability of political discourse. Palin’s recent reference to "blood libel" over her critics is simply ridiculous. Also, her campaign ad showing the icons of "rifle" on her opponents is quite disturbing. Gifford criticized Palin over the ad last year, saying that "such action would lead to a very serious consequence." That well explains the civility of political discourse is under question.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What is utter madness is that anyone is trying to tie an instance of political rhetoric, cross hairs on a poster - whatever - as the reasons that this guy did what he did. All of the sudden everyone, including some hick sheriff and a lot of the liberal media, and psychologists and psychiatrists? David Berkowitz (son of sam) heard a dog talking to him, Charles Manson misinterpreted something he read to indicate that a race war was necessary. Should we blame dogs, or should we blame some text written for a whole different purpose simply because someone with a mental illness misinterpreted them? I believe it's likely a symptom of the schizophrenia or whatever mental issues this guy was suffering from. An acquaintance of mine has a mentally ill son who thinks the CIA is following him, and recently tried to kill his own father. Is that the CIA's fault? Come on folks, we can do better than this. It was a tragedy committed by a misguided kid suffering from a mental illness - nothing more. Very tragic yes, but caused by someone's words?

So I guess it is Marlyn Manson's fault if some kid listens to one of his songs and kills someone. It was laughable when Michael Moore placed the idea before Manson in 'Bowling for Columbine' though asserted after that tragedy. I'm sure many of those on the left thought that notion ridiculous, as any sane person would. It's a dangerous road to travel if you want to assert that anything said by anyone with a public voice can incite such violence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

should say 'hick sheriff and liberal media are psychologists...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ameericajin:

" Palin’s recent reference to "blood libel" over her critics is simply ridiculous. "

It is spot-on. The liberal media´s eagerness to tie a murder by a lunatic on Sara palin is just that, and it is reprehensible.

" Also, her campaign ad showing the icons of "rifle" on her opponents is quite disturbing. "

It is a friggin metaphor and not any more "disturbing" or tied to the murder than the bomb sights that Democratic National congress put on the same map (on republican districts of course).

That the liberal propagandits would stoop this low simply boggles the mind. To their credit, the conservatives have not done likewise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That the liberal propagandits would stoop this low simply boggles the mind. To their credit, the conservatives have not done likewise.

Yeh, like Bachmann hasn't said that she is behind enemy lines and wants her people to have a revolution and to use their second amendment rights. Like to see that happen actually! See how that ALL pans out for you right-wingers. THAT would be great movie. Wait, we did see that once before in Waco Texas where right-wingers defended a guy with 20 wives and had sexually molested young girls and in Oklahoma with Timothy McVeigh, again another 'hero" of the right, protesting big big big government.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is spot-on. The liberal media´s eagerness to tie a murder by a lunatic on Sara palin is just that, and it is reprehensible.

Ditto to Plain's remark. While I agree there's liberal media's problem with tying her with murder attempt, her campaign does not seem to stand apart from what you paint propaganda after all. Her statement simply gives us an impression that she's definitely NOT a good state-woman, which is not surprising to most American people at all.

That the liberal propagandits would stoop this low simply boggles the mind. To their credit, the conservatives have not done likewise.

Not applicable for the lunatics such as Beck, Limbaugh, Ingram, O'Reilly, Savage, etc. Anyway, the people shouldn't underestimate the impact of political discourse, whether it's liberals or conservatives. There’s no doubt it’s affecting our lives for so many years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

americajap:

" Not applicable for the lunatics such as Beck, Limbaugh, Ingram, O'Reilly, Savage, etc. "

Yes, applicable to "lunatics such as Beck, Limbaugh, Ingram, O'Reilly, Savage". None of them have tried to pin this murder on liberal hate rethoric, although there is more than enough of that to go around. Just turn on MSNBC and enjoy the show.

They have not stooped that low. For that, they deserve credit. The liberal side has stooped that low, and continues to. And that is simply reprehensible.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WillieB

Yes, applicable to "lunatics such as Beck, Limbaugh, Ingram, O'Reilly, Savage". None of them have tried to pin this murder on liberal hate rethoric, although there is more than enough of that to go around. Just turn on MSNBC and enjoy the show.

OK. What's the difference between "liberal hate rhetoric" and "paranoid rhetoric" by these conservative folks? I can't see any significant difference between the two in terms of civility. Linking murder with Palin is just one of the ways to stigmatize your enemy. You are suggesting that liberal media is worthy of blame because they 'demonize' her for wrong reason. Well, you should watch how O'Reilly and other conservative folks instigate the viewers in his host show. No media can be innocent without discussing the problem with status of civic discourse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What's the difference between "liberal hate rhetoric" and "paranoid rhetoric" by these conservative folks? I can't see any significant difference between the two in terms of civility.

there's no such thing as "liberal hate rhetoric." The hate rhetoric that so many on the right falsely try to tie to mainstream liberals comes from fringe groups with no support or credibility whatsoever amongst ordinary libs and Democrats.

The far-left fringe groups are very useful to so many on the right wing becaue they obviously serve to provide cover for their own brand of hatred and violent invective.

MSNBC is a terrific network providing great analysis of the news that includes views from both sides of the political spectrum. "Morning Joe" is awesome.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

in his host show.

I meant in "their own" host shows.

The hate rhetoric that so many on the right falsely try to tie to mainstream liberals comes from fringe groups with no support or credibility whatsoever amongst ordinary libs and Democrats.

That's possibly one of the main problems with liberal discourse in the US media, although it's not surprising to me. It reminds me of Pat Robertson and some whacky evangelists' folks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites