WhiteHawk comments

May she live on forever in the hearts of those who knew her.

Other celebrities who have stepped in include Lady Gaga who raised $250,000 in 48 hours by selling red and white wristbands bearing the message “We Pray for Japan” for $5 a piece via her merchandise website.

Gagger "donated" money paid by others for bracelets someone else made. Not quite the same to me as Ms Bullock donating directly from her own funds, but oh well. Thanks are in order for the people who bought those bracelets.

An unhealthy economy swells the welfare rolls.

And what does the U.S. have? An unhealthy economy. Japan, don't make our mistakes.

Why struggle? is the implied message. You can live pretty comfortably on welfare, if you know the ropes.

Which is exactly the attitude that has been the ruin of U.S. society for decades, and trillions of dollars.

I see, at my current job, people on welfare and food stamps (EBT cards) who seem to have plenty of money for the latest phones, fashionable clothes and jewelry and tattoos. Quite frustrating, and frankly insulting to the rest of us.

Last month, customs at Narita airport nabbed three drug smugglers, all males in their 50s or 60s. Subsequent investigation resulted in the apprehension of a drug ring of about 10 men, of whom many were in their 70s.

Could it just be potheads are getting older? The 60's were some time ago... ;)

Cleo! Glad to see you're still among us! A few people said you live in the northeast, and I was genuinely worried about you.

As Sarge noted, the U.S. State Dept. advised Americans to not travel to Japan during this crisis. If I were a trained in rescue or an EMT, or could help in any way, I would be there as fast as I could. But since I can't be of help at this time, I'm staying here and donating what little money I have left to aid agencies.

The last thing Japan needs is more people using what resources they have available. Fuel needs to be reserved for emergency and relief vehicles. Medicine needs to be transported, and blankets delivered to keep people warm in the shelters.

But when the time comes, and Japan has the resources to support tourism again, I'll be back over there.

arrestpaul:

She appeared in disguise because the FBI knows who she is.

Oh, but she's just an innocent little girl! A child!

;)

Or maybe it is compassion for the less fortunate.

I see and interact with the "less fortunate" on an almost daily basis. Most of them are just "gaming the system". They play on the guilt of the "compassionate".

He also moved forward to healthcare reform to insure that insurance companies cannot reject people because of illnesses or if they operations become too expensive (where that is notorious in the USA).

If those were the only reasons for the health-care reform legislation, then there wouldn't have been so much opposition (65% of those polled) to it.

And gas prices were raised near the end of the Bush era.....really?

Gas prices averaged under $1.80 when Obama took office. They're averaging over $3.00 now.

Agein, you mention exactly that which needs healing: the idea that pointing out obvious distortions in a story is the same thing as "demonizing" the people who are distorting.

Ever look in the mirror?

I believe

You have made it sufficiently clear that you're going to believe whatever you want, despite any and all evidence to the contrary. You downplay Kenneth Gladney's injuries, then turn around and exaggerate Lauren Valle's treatment. You link the Tea Party and the GOP, but refuse to ignore the connection between violent left-wing groups and the DNC, despite their decades-long history of common goals, ideals, donors and supporters.

My hope is that the opponents of President Obama and those who hold liberal principles would take a vow to hold to the truth.

My hope is that President Obama and the members of his administration and cabinet start telling the truth. Then - maybe - their sycophantic enablers in the media and on forums will follow suit.

Looks like it's gonna be a looooong wait.

And the government spending of WWII was Keynesian economics on steroids.

Ah. So, according to your version of history, government spending and debt only made the Great Depression last longer, until that spending and debt was seriously increased. I guess that explains why those who criticized Bush for spending and deficits then voted for Obama to increase both exponentially.

The interesting thing is, it's not working... again.

Prior to WWII, FDR spent massive amounts of money on "busy work"; work that was designed to keep people busy, but not necessarily productive. We didn't have productivity until we had to build factories, planes, ships, tank, guns, etc., for the war effort.

And again, Obama is spending massive amounts of money on unemployment benefits, food stamps, some busy work, "green initiatives" and other non-productive bottomless pits. Where is the productivity? Where is the genuine progress? Where is the growth? Instead, food prices are rising, fuel prices are rising, while jobs and income are still low and stagnant.

Oh yeah, that's forward.

Molenir, what's pathetic is that despite the laws and regulations, it is so damn easy to get a gun in America. That is because they are not enforced, allowing gun dealers to sell their guns to just anyone without fear of any punishments.

You were doing well, right up until that last bit. It's not the gun dealers. They have to obey state and federal laws such as not selling to anyone who doesn't pass the FBI background check. Gun dealers can lose their license - and many have. So claiming that they can "sell guns to anyone without fear of any punishment" is completely false.

Here in Tennessee, we have gun shows from time to time. People attempt to buy and sell guns in the parking lot outside the events, not knowing that there are vans, pickups and RVs with Metro police and TBI agents filming sales and photographing people and license plates. A lot of arrests and gun confiscations have resulted from those efforts. More states should follow that example.

And the gun manufavturers lobby to maintain this by slowing up the political wheels to change things.

How, exactly? Since the problem is a lack of enforcement of existing gun laws, how do the gun manufacturers "slow up the political wheels" of enforcing gun laws?

Seems if America can't be responsible to handle and regulate gun ownership, it should be illegal to all.

If America doesn't enforce the existing gun laws, how could it enforce a ban? Especially when bordering Mexico. Sorry, but that's an even more impractical and unrealistic solution than making alcohol illegal, which we tried before.

Here endeth the lesson, and the rhetoric.

Teaching is a two-way street. Have you learned anything from this discussion? Or did you think you were here solely to teach those who actually live in America and own guns?

By the way, did you know that more women have carry permits in Tennessee than men? By an almost 3-1 ratio, in fact. Do you know why? It's not about being cowboys, or Dirty Harry. It's about not being the next rape, kidnapping or murder victim. Gun ownership does more to make women equal in our society than the National Organization for Women.

Expecially since the report of the NYT "apologizing" is a complete fabrication -- one that you bought without questioning. That an individual's viewpoint is printed in the opinion pages, it does not equate to an apology from the editors.

Where did I say I "bought it"? SolidariTea didn't mention the name of the article, much less provide a link, so how could I read it? My comment was exactly as it would appear to a reasonable person: Don't hold your breath. Waiting for left-wing forum hacks to apologize for politicizing a tragedy and using it to demonize conservatives would be like waiting for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to renounce Islam and become a rabbi.

By "political history" can be meant almost anything, including the two people were once in the same room together and seen talking.

Um, no. That is false, not to mention a ridiculous idea to float or use as a defense. I doubt even Robert Gibbs would go that far.

Of course, if you insist on using that line of thought (can't rightly call it logic or reasoning), I can tuck that bit of info away and use it against one of your arguments in the future. We'll see how valid you think it is when the political tables are turned the other way.

Only that she was fumbling at trying to position it where he could see it. The motions of someone trying to hit someone intentionally with a small cardboard sign would appear differently.

... perhaps to someone with the luxury of watching it over and over in slow motion on YouTube. But to the people on the scene, at that moment, they saw a person swinging a sizable object at the head of another human being. You can second-guess all you want, but it's pointless.

Putting one's foot down on the lower neck

Lower neck? First you said "head", now you say "lower neck". How many more posts before you admit that it was the shoulder?

I will be glad to respond to any point or question posed within a single, on-topic post.

Then why haven't you?

why you can't

Should have read "why can't you".

No, the Keynesian policies of FDR and the New Deal kept the Great Depression going with no end in sight. Only the productivity necessary for WWII created the labor market and economy the country needed.

SolidariTea:

The NY tiimes has publicly aploligized for trying to politicize the tragedy in Arizona and use it to demonize conservatives. I expect their leftwing readership will eventually be able to do the same.

Don't hold your breath.

Speaking of the NYT, a recent article (Looking Behind the Mug-Shot Grin), noted that Loughner's "anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush".

The polarizing divide in this statement is the gulf between "political history" and "pal-ling around with" a current, active terrorist.

So you don't deny that a presidential candidate had a political history with a domestic terrorist? I asked you before to show where Ayers renounced his terrorist ways. You haven't provided anything.

That those among Palin's supporters were inspired to yell out "kill him!" is every bit as terroristic as the worst of a Black Panther rally.

Nope. The Tea Party hasn't beaten, shot or killed anyone. The Black Panthers did.

The young woman was in no way violent.

She struck Rand Paul in the face with her "small" cardboard sign.

That a 23 year-old girl with a sign is considered some kind of threat by the big, bad right-wingers speaks volumes about them.

It speaks volumes about your double standards. There was no way to know that she was going to stop at hitting Paul with her sign. There was no way to know she wasn't armed, like the 22-year-old "boy" was last week. Your Monday-morning quarterbacking is as worthless as it is desperate.

This is completely untrue. The DNC has nothing to do with them.

Other than sharing ideals, goals, and sometimes members with them.

Technically, the bottom of the Tea Party thug's foot was on the base of her neck. By virtue of the fact that the girl's head happened to be connected to her neck, pushing down on the neck necessarily forced her head down against the curb.

Man, that's some desperate stretching. It would be funny, except you believe every word of it. Watch the video again. She was already on the ground, her head was not forced against the curb.

By the way, I do not condone the actions of the person who put his foot on her shoulder. She was already sufficiently restrained, although he might not have realized it at that time.

The only thing the "first video" shows is an attempt to show the sign to the candidate as he's arriving in his car -- not any attempt to "strike" him with it.

But strike him she did, intentionally or not.

And you're still deflecting. I see you have no answers or counters for my other questions and points. I'll take that to mean you concede on those points.

It can't happen because, unlike the Democrats, the TP-ers don't have any workable plan for moving the nation forward.

Forward? Towards what? A healthy, growing economy? No, Obama made it clear when he was campaigning that he was more interested in his (and the Left's) idea of a "fair" economy. And we're seeing that in action. More people on food stamps than ever before and rising. More people unemployed and underemployed than in several decades. More new taxes levied, and more entitlement programs. None of which could even remotely spark substantive economic growth. And this is all with Obama's (and the Left's) blessing.

Where's your debt ceiling, yabits?

This is something like saying that since quality control can't produce perfection, the answer is less quality control rather then more and better quality control.

Ah, but you just said:

There are no laws that are adequate to the task of keeping guns out of the hands of people prone to violence at the drop of a hat.

So are adequate laws possible, or aren't they? Pick one.

I understand that the "brains" in the NRA may not be attuned or astute enough to come up with such laws, but they are a relative no-brainer.

Well if they're a no-brainer, then how come nobody on the left has come up with them either? And that includes you, lad. I asked you before what laws are needed, and you said:

The answer to this is better suited to the thread on gun laws. I will post my response there.

... but you haven't. Still.

On the other hand, enlightened people see the highest form of personal responsibility in seeing to it that violent people can't get easy access to guns as this crazed individual did.

No, that's collective responsibility. Personal responsibility is when the individual bears the responsibility on their own.

"enlightened"... hahaha, for the love of...

Steps were taken. Laws were passed. One political hack sheriff didn't do his job and - you know the rest. You keep saying that there should be a "greater wall" put in place, but when asked for suggestions, you can't come up with anything. For all of your posturing and calling those who disagree with you as "too dumb", why you can't even answer your own questions, much less anybody else's?

There are no laws that are adequate to the task of keeping guns out of the hands of people prone to violence at the drop of a hat.

I guess that means you won't be answering my previous question (Like what, exactly?) as you said you would on another thread.

It's true that there are no laws adequate to prevent violence. Yet there are those on the Left who seem to expect exactly that from yet more laws. The only practical solution is to prepare yourself. But that comes down to personal responsibility, to which those on the Left seem to be averse. Just think of it as wearing a motorcycle helmet, or wearing a seatbelt, or buying a car with airbags.

How ironic that the same people who want more laws to prevent violence ridicule those who prepare themselves in case of violence as "paranoid". Neither group wants to be the victim of violence. One group wants others to bear the responsibility, with more laws on top of other good laws which aren't always enforced. The other group embraces their own responsibility for themselves and uses a tactic proven effective for self-defense.

Just sayin'.

yabits:

What is amusing is how, when examples of Republican/Tea Party violent rhetoric are brought up -- examples directly taken from those sources -- the counter-examples offered are from groups like the Weather Underground, SLA and Black Panthers. I'd call that a very different set of standards.

Your lone example "violent rhetoric" at a GOP event is a candidate mentioning the FACT that a DNC candidate has a political history with an admitted domestic terrorist. Your lone example of Tea Party "violence" is the restraining of a violent left-wing protester.

I have made the case that left-wing groups such as Weather Underground, the (New) Black Panthers, the SEIU and others not only share goals and ideals (and sometimes members) with the DNC, they act as de facto support groups for the DNC. You have not made a substantive argument to counter that. I have also asked you which groups on the right do they same for the GOP, and you have no answer.

Obama gets called a socialist for proposing a health care plan nearly identical to the one proposed by Bob Dole during his 1996 campaign.

Did the Republican elect Bob Dole? No? Fascinating.

Anyone who didn't condone lying could not refer to the young woman as a "paid violent agent." What was captured on video went beyond simple restraint. She was already fully and completely restrained when one of the Tea Party thugs curb-stomped her.

Apparently, you're again being selective with which videos you'll watch: v=yiLeud-sxrM

The picture of the Tea Party candidate's troup in Alaska jack-booting a young girl's head on a curb takes the prize.

At no time did anyone step on her head. v=SbnEy_U9pYk

Lauren Valle was 23 at the time of the incident.

a young girl of 23

No such thing. Admittedly, in the world of the Left, a 23-year-old is still considered a "child" (such as the Left's rhetoric about "Bush sending your children off to die"), but on the right, a 23-year-old is an adult fully responsible for their actions.

Her sign was a standard cardboard sign, which she can be seen holding in the video that shows her being curb-stomped by a Tea Party thug.

Which she used to strike Rand Paul, as seen in the first video.

She's strictly committed to non-violence --

No, apparently not.

I see you have no answers or counters for my other questions and points. I'll take that to mean you concede on those points.

Then, Whitehawk, why is it so easy for people in America to ILLEGALLY obtain a gun?...because the government doesn't restrict them with enough laws and the authorities don't enforce the regulations imposed to restrict their sale to such responsible owners only,

Here, again is what I posted:

Perhaps it's because history has shown that we can trust the judgment of legal gun owners.

Did you miss the part where I emphasized the word legal?

Once again: We have more than enough gun laws. We have less than enough enforcement.

virgo:

The NRA loves this as well as gun manufacturers and the military.

The NRA has only supported, endorsed or produced one video game. In it, the shooter shoots at paper targets on a simulated gun range. No silhouettes even, just round bullseye-style targets.

Many in America have never been to a third world country. Unfortunately, many parts of the USA resemble those I have been to.

I suspect those place are inner cities like Chicago and Washington D.C., where guns have been banned for decades.

The silence about gun restriction only pisses on the grave of the beautiful 9 year old girl who was killed in Arizona.

Effective laws to prevent this atrocity were already in place. They simply weren't enforced.

Madverts:

She used a map complete with gun-sights to identify her opponents. One of these oppenents taking a head-shot, whilst also being the nutter's mark for pete's sake.

So did DailyKos (bullseyes, in that case). Is Markos Moulitas justly implicated as well?

By all accounts, Loughner has hated and been obsessed with Giffords since 2007, before Palin was known outside of Alaska. How come you refuse to acknowledge either of those points?

Wolfpack:

I have always disliked the fact that the media is always trying to put a microphone in front of people that have just been traumatized by a crime or tragedy. It is the worst kind of journalism because it prey's on the raw emotions of victims in order to generate a type of story that will help some journalists career and get high ratings for their particular media outlet.

I agree completely. It has always been incredibly distasteful, and makes so many members of the media appear to be opportunistic, sociopathic vultures.

Perhaps it's just a coincidence that 93% of the media votes Democrat? Oops, I did it again... ;)

Stevecpfc, I haven't missed a single thing. The man who attacked me used a nylon strap, not a gun. He snuck up behind me and put it around my neck, lifting me off my feet. I couldn't afford to wait to see if he was going to kill me or not before I passed out from the lack of oxygen. I dropped both bags of groceries and took the appropriate action.

Stop thinking about guns, criminals, violence and self-defense with such narrow view. Criminals - especially violent ones - will use any tool, any technique, they can. If you think I'm a "loser" for defending myself, then you have a self-defeating mindset.

yabits:

Nor is the Tea Party sponsoring a serious debate on gun laws.

Why should they? The appropriate laws (both gun-related and otherwise) were already in place to prevent such an atrocity. For the hundreth time in this debate, I'm reminding you that they were not enforced.

More unintended humor no doubt. I do understand the need by the right to scapegoat one sheriff.

However, a system that enables a deranged fellow like Loughner to acquire the kind of weapon and ammunition he did has got far more wrong with it than a single sheriff.

That's a pathetically desperate attempt to make excuses for one of your fellow Democrats.

We have laws on the books to prevent just such an atrocity and it's increasingly apparent that they weren't enforced. Neither you nor anyone else has suggested a reasonable, practical, or even possible solution.

KakiOko:

Guns and their accessories, on a daily basis being modified and improved, have only purpose....to be able to kill human beings more effectively, in greater numbers, and allowing one to efficiently reload to do so again. It then relies on the individuals judgement as to whether the gun should be used in a such a fashion.

Perhaps it's because history has shown that we can trust the judgment of legal gun owners.

The fact that criminals and practically anyone in America can so freely gain access to a gun just shows me that America doesn't realise or accept this or they would have better regulations which they actually enforce rather than just pay lip-service to.

I doubt it's as easy to get guns illegally as is so commonly portrayed in TV shows and movies. And we do have very good regulations in every state. Enforcement is the problem in some states.

Ever heard of Timothy McVeigh?

Yes. He hated politicians from both sides of America's political aisle with equal disdain.

donkusai:

If he owns guns, I hope they take them off him even if the psych test doesn't show a problem (he did make a threat to kill someone). If they'd done the same to the guy who killed the original 6 after he was kicked out of college with "issues", then perhaps all this could have been avoided. The last thing we want is mentally unstable people with guns.

arrestpaul:

FINALLY, the Sheriff's deputies take a deranged individual into custody for threatening society. Why didn't the Sheriff allow his deputies to take Jared Loughner into custody BEFORE he started shooting?

The system seems to work if only the Sheriff had done his job.

THANK YOU! That's what I've been saying all along!

stevecpfc, I'm alive today because I was armed when a mugger attacked me. Do you not recognize the deaths inflicted by criminals, including unarmed ones?

To put it accurately: First, I don't consider myself a "leftist." My politics are of the liberal/democratic tradition. I understand the great need by those on the far right wing to portray all liberal Democrats as "leftists." It's simply part of a general pattern of misinformation.

Of course you don't consider yourself a Leftist. Who does? Please remind me of the times when you've posted anything remotely centrist, or even right-of-center. And how far back does your "liberal/democratic tradition" run? Back to JFK? Or just Carter?

Not all liberal Democrats are Leftists. Giffords is an example of that. But the far Left is running the Democrat party these days. Dean, Pelosi, Obama... Reid is the only national Democrat leader who can come close to claiming the "moderate" or "traditional" Democrat label.

Violence can be incited, especially in those already prone to violence.

As the Left has a history of proving. I'm still waiting for your examples of Tea Party violence.

In all the democratic rallies I have ever attended, I have never seen nor witnessed even the suggestion that a political opponent be hanged in effigy.

So if it doesn't happen in front of your very eyes, it has never happened. Perhaps you should open your eyes then. I just did a Bing search for "Bush burned in effigy" and got 106,000 results. That doesn't mean it happened 106,000 times in eight years, but it does mean that it happened and has been covered.

You should visit Zombietime. Lots of coverage on there about Leftist, liberal-Democrat and DNC events in San Francisco on there. They all have an uncanny similarity...