Arizona Congresswoman Giffords (D-AZ) Shot During Public Event

[quote name='depascal22']I have a big problem with the coverage so far.

Why does Mein Kampf get lumped in with left wing literature? The shooter read the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf but it makes him a crazy left winger? I own both books as they're polar opposites. If anything, it shows that he didn't know what the hell he believed in and was just trying to read anything that might give him some purpose. It wouldn't surprise me if they found Nietzsche in his collection as well.

It just points to a crazed individual that finally snapped. He wasn't a left wing nutjob or a crazed right wing Tea Partier.[/QUOTE]

Then whatever will people argue about now?
 
[quote name='depascal22']I have a big problem with the coverage so far.

Why does Mein Kampf get lumped in with left wing literature? The shooter read the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf but it makes him a crazy left winger? I own both books as they're polar opposites. If anything, it shows that he didn't know what the hell he believed in and was just trying to read anything that might give him some purpose. It wouldn't surprise me if they found Nietzsche in his collection as well.

It just points to a crazed individual that finally snapped. He wasn't a left wing nutjob or a crazed right wing Tea Partier.

EDIT -- The years of preparation make this dicey. I'm not sure what to think about this guy.[/QUOTE]

If you know how people perceive Hitler and how he ran things, you'll know why it gets lumped in with left wing literature.
 
[quote name='neocisco']Then whatever will people argue about now?[/QUOTE]

Guns:

Left-This is an example of how we need to make owning and buying guns more difficult.

Right-If someone at the event had a concealed weapon with them more lives could have been saved.
 
[quote name='rumblebear']http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...s-legislation-to-protect-lawmakers-officials/

Rep. Robert Brady will introduce legislation against Sarah Palin for her role in this massacre. Hope it passes.[/QUOTE]
More brilliance.
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.
Click to expand...
No more burning politicians in effigy; Certainly there's no civil liberties that could be abridged by this.

I'll file this with my articles on anti-flag burning legislation/jackassery.
 
[quote name='depascal22']EDIT -- The years of preparation make this dicey. I'm not sure what to think about this guy.[/QUOTE]

Ha, I typed up a big bit about the second guy they were looking for mostly likely being the key to the puzzle and while doing research, found out that the man they were looking for was the taxi driver who drove the shooter to the store. They thought he was involved since he went in the store too but he only went in to find the shooter since he didn't pay.

[quote name='RedvsBlue']Right-If someone at the event had a concealed weapon with them more lives could have been saved.[/QUOTE]

Which is stupid thinking. The Congresswomen still would have been shot by that moment and the guy shot until he ran out of bullets, at which point, bystanders tackled him to the ground. Arizona has some of the laxest gun laws in the nation. I doubt opening them up even more could have stopped this.
 
Representative Bob Brady of Pennsylvania told The Caucus he plans to introduce a bill that would ban symbols like that now-infamous campaign crosshair map.
"You can't threaten the president with a bullseye or a crosshair," Mr. Brady, a Democrat, said, and his measure would make it a crime to do so to a member of Congress or federal employee, as well.
Asked if he believed the map incited the gunman in Tucson, he replied, "I don't know what's in that nut's head. I would rather be safe than sorry."
He continued, "This is not a wakeup call. This is a major alarm going off. We need to be more civil with each other. We need to tone down this rhetoric."
Click to expand...

Hopefully this will get bipartisan condemnation. Whenever something terrible happens, I don't think the solution is to further restrict speech.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Hopefully this will get bipartisan condemnation. Whenever something terrible happens, I don't think the solution is to further restrict speech.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. People need to learn a little something called self-regulation.
 
So it's the "2011 we're scared of the public act" bill? Surprised it hasn't come up sooner. Oh wait, it's already unlawful to threaten someone. Besides, it's not like they enforce that stuff unless it's against the President.

I mean next they'll say we can't yell "Fire" really loud in a crowded movie theater.
 
[quote name='h3llbring3r']More brilliance.
[/QUOTE]

What applying the law to include elected officials? Hell a family member of mine was tried for felony death threats, made while drunk, and they tried to force him into prison for 20 years. Why should political nutters be more protected then regular nutters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='soonersfan60']Since all the liberals in the thread claim to like "balance," the Phoenix New Times (which I have no idea whether it leans one way or the other) said that the shooter's "ex-" friends said he was a "left wing pot head..."

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/01/jared_loughner_alleged_shooter.php[/QUOTE]

welcome to yesterday buddy

what are you going to tell us next? that he also had the communist manifesto and mein kampf listed under his favorite books on myspace (STANDARD LIEBERAL ANTI-AMERICAN READING MATERIAL AM I RITE?!?!?!?), that he was obsessed with the GOLD STANDARD and MIND CONTROL (although that sounds like a LOLibertarian)
 
[quote name='soonersfan60']Since all the liberals in the thread claim to like "balance," the Phoenix New Times (which I have no idea whether it leans one way or the other) said that the shooter's "ex-" friends said he was a "left wing pot head..."

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/01/jared_loughner_alleged_shooter.php[/QUOTE]

A classmate of the man accused of shooting Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords this morning describes him as "left wing" and a "pot head" in a series of posts on Twitter this afternoon.
...
We've confirmed that Parker and Loughner went to school together at Mountain View High School in Tucson and that both attended Pima Community College, so her claims of knowing Loughner seem to be legit.
Click to expand...

That sure is some crackerjack reporting. Thanks for bringing this important story to our attention.
 
Very interesting- His fixation with Giffords may have dated back to 2007:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071191163461466.html

Mr. Montanaro said his friend "was never really political," but "really tried to be philosophical." Mr. Loughner liked "contemplating the meaning of words and the origin of language," Mr. Montanaro said.
That interest might have triggered Mr. Loughner's first meeting with Ms. Giffords in 2007. Mr. Loughner said he asked the lawmaker, "How do you know words mean anything?" recalled Mr. Montanaro. He said Mr. Loughner was "aggravated" when Ms. Giffords, after pausing for a couple of seconds, "responded to him in Spanish and moved on with the meeting."
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='dohdough'][quote name='MorPhiend']Again, Exactly. But typical lefty bomb thrower. Sees two pieces of evidence against his cause before him. Picks the more benign fact to explain away and ignores the more damning one altogether.[/QUOTE]

Ok Mr. Super Smart Guy. How about you give context to all of those examples since you're so familiar with them if you say that I lack context.[/quote]

Still waiting tuff guy.
 
How could he not want to respond to someone who referred to him as "Mr. Super Smart Guy"? I bet he's just being a stoopid lil doody head.
 
[quote name='camoor']That sure is some crackerjack reporting. Thanks for bringing this important story to our attention.[/QUOTE]

Where else are you going to get such in-depth reporting? We all know that Twitter is the new New York Times.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']There aren't too many people on the left trying to say this transcends party lines, but many on the right who are. That's the textbook definition of trying to distance yourself from something.[/QUOTE]

Translation: There are a whole lot of people on the left that are trying to to turn a tragedy into a chance to score political points, while there's a whole lot of people on the right who are saying "Hey, this isn't about politics.".
 
Well, classmate = friend if the classmate/friend is saying shit that agrees with your political view.

[quote name='UncleBob']Translation: There are a whole lot of people on the left that are trying to to turn a tragedy into a chance to score political points, while there's a whole lot of people on the right who are saying "Hey, this isn't about politics.".[/QUOTE]

No, I think both sides are trying to score political points. I see a lot of blogs/comments saying 'It's HORRIBLE that people are trying to politicize this....although the guy was a liberal fascist progressive, look what he read!!!!!'
 
[quote name='neocisco']I'm pretty sure RvB wasn't stating that as his personal opinion, just as part of extreme views from both sides.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I'm tired of hearing both sides' tired old arguments about gun control. They both always have the exact same argument and frankly I think both sides (the extremes) are wrong. Nevertheless as soon as there's any type of public shooting you hear both sides revvin' up their arguments.
 
[quote name='IRHari']No, I think both sides are trying to score political points. I see a lot of blogs/comments saying 'It's HORRIBLE that people are trying to politicize this....although the guy was a liberal fascist progressive, look what he read!!!!!'[/QUOTE]

Why is it so hard to believe that people genuinely want right wingers to stop inciting others to act violently?

Also, pointing out the fact Republican Leaders as well as their rank and file use extremist, elimination rhetoric and that some people take it seriously and act accordingly isn't politicizing anything.

It is an objective description of reality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
After Ft. Hood Shootings by Major Hassan:

"The important thing is for everyone not to jump to conclusions," said retired Gen. Wesley Clark on CNN the night of the shootings.
Click to expand...

"We cannot jump to conclusions," said CNN's Jane Velez-Mitchell that same evening. "We have to make sure that we do not jump to any conclusions whatsoever."
Click to expand...

"I'm on Pentagon chat room," said former CIA operative Robert Baer on CNN, also the night of the shooting. "Right now, there's messages going back and forth, saying do not jump to the conclusion this had anything to do with Islam."
Click to expand...

The next day, President Obama underscored the rapidly-forming conventional wisdom when he told the country, "I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts." In the days that followed, CNN jouralists and guests repeatedly echoed the president's remarks.
Click to expand...

"We can't jump to conclusions," Army Gen. George Casey said on CNN November 8. The next day, political analyst Mark Halperin urged a "transparent" investigation into the shootings "so the American people don't jump to conclusions." And when Republican Rep. Pete Hoekstra, then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, suggested that the Ft. Hood attack was terrorism, CNN's John Roberts was quick to intervene. "Now, President Obama has asked people to be very cautious here and to not jump to conclusions," Roberts said to Hoekstra. "By saying that you believe this is an act of terror, are you jumping to a conclusion?"
Click to expand...

And when Republican Rep. Pete Hoekstra, then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, suggested that the Ft. Hood attack was terrorism, CNN's John Roberts was quick to intervene. "Now, President Obama has asked people to be very cautious here and to not jump to conclusions," Roberts said to Hoekstra. "By saying that you believe this is an act of terror, are you jumping to a conclusion?"
Click to expand...



But as soon as it's some white kid shooting up a joint, Primary Mission: Figure out how to use this as leverage for Fairness Doctrine legislation, because people like Msut will buy it hook line and sinker.
 
[quote name='soonersfan60']Since all the liberals in the thread claim to like "balance," the Phoenix New Times (which I have no idea whether it leans one way or the other) said that the shooter's "ex-" friends said he was a "left wing pot head..."

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/01/jared_loughner_alleged_shooter.php[/QUOTE]

You'd be surprised how little people know about their classmates. Anyone that doesn't fit in with the group is some sort of "left wing pot head". I just hope the right doesn't latch onto this and say, "See. We told you marijuana is bad. Let's stiffen the penalties for possession."

@Bob And so far the right has been just as guilty with the politicization. They saw the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf and said "Liberal fasicst progressive killed his own." Never mind that Mein Kampf is hardcore RIGHT wing propaganda. Everything I've seen said the guy was a left wing nut even though it seems like he had no political affiliation or philosophical rock to guide him.
 
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/74882/511/541568

ii2Q2.png


If this isn't a target list specifically targeting Giffords made by democrats...
 
Republicans> IT'S NOT POLITICAL, STOP MAKING IT POLITICAL

Republicans then proceed to find every tiny insignificant microscopic "proof" that he was a lefty, like That One Guy, and That One Other Guy, and That One Guy 2.

This is also how their economic plan generally functions.
 
Is that nonsensical whine related to my post? Where were you when liberals were trying to connect this to republicans based on sarah palins target lists?
 
[quote name='AdultLink']Is that nonsensical whine related to my post? Where were you when liberals were trying to connect this to republicans based on sarah palins target lists?[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Lee Atwater']You start out in 1954 by saying, "N-word, n-word, n-word." By 1968 you can't say "n-word" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N-word, n-word."[/quote]

And how is this relevant you might ask? Well when someone says bulleye without using other descriptors, it just means an object of focus. When someone uses a scope sight, "reload," promotes firearm use, and agrees with second amendment remedies, it's a little different. It ceases to be abstract. Dog-whistles...people do hear them.
 
[quote name='depascal22']You'd be surprised how little people know about their classmates. Anyone that doesn't fit in with the group is some sort of "left wing pot head".[/QUOTE]

I just got a kick out of how some people's initial posts were tying this to Palin and Beck without any shred of evidence of a true connection, but then ignoring actual evidence (even if a bit flimsy) because I'm sure the posters in this thread know more about the shooter's mindset than someone who actually interacted with him.
 
[quote name='soonersfan60']I just got a kick out of how some people's initial posts were tying this to Palin and Beck without any shred of evidence of a true connection, but then ignoring actual evidence (even if a bit flimsy) because I'm sure the posters in this thread know more about the shooter's mindset than someone who actually interacted with him.[/QUOTE]
I was one of those kids that others thought that I was a Columbine type. I kept to myself, drew a lot, liked anime, socially awkward, and didn't have many friends. Many kids would say the same shit about me as that classmate. How many out of those 150 students in my graduating class actually knew anything about me? Maybe 10 at the most. How many of those were friends? Like 3.

Interaction doesn't mean shit if you don't try to learn something about someone.
 
I would love to see how the people on here who twist anything into pro liberal anti conservative twist the guys own words on above top secret.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='AdultLink']I would love to see how the people on here who twist anything into pro liberal anti conservative twist the guys own words on above top secret.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, but your bait is rancid. It's just the innocuous ramblings of a person that doesn't seem to grasp negative numbers and mixes philosophy with logic. Better luck tomorrow. Posting that link says more about your partisan hackery than anything else.

Is there even any proof beyond reddit that it's the shooter?
 
[quote name='Msut77']If right wingers didn't tone down the rhetoric after the Oklahoma City Bombing they aren't going to now.[/QUOTE]
Maybe they should shove it down our throats...LOLZ. Reverse psychology amirite...rotflcoprters
 
[quote name='soonersfan60']I just got a kick out of how some people's initial posts were tying this to Palin and Beck without any shred of evidence of a true connection, but then ignoring actual evidence (even if a bit flimsy) because I'm sure the posters in this thread know more about the shooter's mindset than someone who actually interacted with him.[/QUOTE]
Either you have an issue with reading comprehension, or you're simply seeing what you want to see. I beleive most of us were saying that people like Beck and Palin create an environment that fosters behavior such as these. Doesn't mean this guy did what he did because of them, but they're creating a environment of hostility with the language and symbolism they're using. They won't take responsibility though, they'll simply retreat and throw up walls to limit any kind of connection.

You can see this in the way Palin has reacted to this shooting. she knows some of the things they've done in the past looks bad so they're trying to limit any connection. If they'd never done any of that she'd have nothing to be worried about.
 
Link really is like a forum STD. He shows up every now and then, irritates the hell out of you, then goes away only to come back again later when you least expect it.

At least Bob and Knoell don't just show up, vomit on all of us, then run away.
 
I think tying a tragedy like this to rhetoric from the talking heads is just as lame as pinning things like school shootings on violent games and movies etc.

Such things are nothing more than maybe the final push or justification for a crazy loser to commit violence,and not the cause, and they likely would have done something bad eventually anyway.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Sorry, but your bait is rancid. It's just the innocuous ramblings of a person that doesn't seem to grasp negative numbers and mixes philosophy with logic. Better luck tomorrow. Posting that link says more about your partisan hackery than anything else.

Is there even any proof beyond reddit that it's the shooter?[/QUOTE]

It's the ramblings of someone who doesn't have the mental capacity to follow a political avenue, esp. since he doesn't have the mental capacity to UNDERSTAND DATE AND TIME.

I'm just a voice of reason. Sorry that reason doesn't agree with your blind hate of the right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top