Merged Rep. Giffords Shot In Tucson

Infoexcavator said:
People keep saying that the crosshair means that Palin wanted to get these people killed with a gun but the bullseye symbol means nothing, I have made a great discovery relating to this issue:

A glock pistol does not have a reticle or a crosshair, it has iron sights. Thus Palin is not guilty for murder.
Click to expand...

no one is saying anything of the sort.:rolleyes:
the fact that palin's website showed politicians in crosshairs was meant metaphorically to make them political targets.
metaphor, however, is not clear to all.
the image is suggestive, and therefore, potentially dangerous.
 
Dorian Gray said:
At first, I read that as 'misquoto' - then I realized that you misspelled 'mosquito'. Misspelled it! Where's the FAAAACTS, Counselor? FAAAAAAAAAAACTS!
Click to expand...

Obvious troll is obvious :rolleyes:

Speaking of that, when are you going to post some?
Click to expand...

Seeing as how I was one of those who originated that demand, long ago in the thread, DG's challenge amuses me. I'm sure the trustworthy facts will come about as the investigation continues.

The buzzing of the mosquito continues...
 
Last edited:
deepatrax said:
when you can't counter their FACTS...correct their Grammar

bravo!
Click to expand...

No, the relevance of your facts has already been addressed and everyone here already knows the validity of your posts.

I don't gain anything by continuing to correct your arguments.
None of the other posters here seem to be falling for them.
You very clearly aren't going to change your mind.

So what exactly would addressing your "facts" accomplish?

The only positive thing I could see coming out of any interaction with your posts was that you might leave with slightly less atrocious grammar. Unless you're one of those willful poor spellers, I think I've accomplished that.

What have you accomplished?
 
MattusMaximus said:
Obvious troll is obvious :rolleyes:



Seeing as how I originated that demand, long ago in the thread, DG's challenge amuses me. I'm sure the trustworthy facts will come about as the investigation continues.

The buzzing of the mosquito continues...
Click to expand...
Your hypocrisy amuses you? Shrieking for others to spoon feed you facts that you could go look up yourself amuses you? Your neverending quest for FAAAAACTS amuses you?

You're like a Gollum fact zombie. FAAAAAAAACTS! FAAAAAAAAAAACTSSSSSSS!!!!! We WANNNNNNTSSSSSSS THEMMMMMM!!!!! Why won't it gives them to ussssss?
 
deepatrax said:
you may have missed the part of this thread which showed that the Left wing DailyKos also used the word "targeted" and named Rep. Giffords describing how she had a "bullseye" on her

Now, I don't point this out as if to claim the DailyKos is to blame...but merely to point out that BOTH sides use the same type of rhetoric.
Click to expand...

True, and both sides (or more, because there are more than two parties in the US) are wrong to use it. Can we at least agree on that much?

That I saw only Palin's image first led me to wrongly assume that was the only one. And I'll freely admit I don't like her. She's the reason I fell away from caring about politics anymore. Her campaign was the final straw for me. I just don't need the aggravation. I'd like to see her drop out of politics. I don't think she's good for the country, regardless of her party affiliations. But since I control none of that, I just try to stay away from it, the best I can. I have plenty to stress out about, without adding more.

I can happily amend my opinion to say that any politico who uses a map with obvious targets on it, in that manner, has no place in American politics. And I'll state again, that is only my opinion. I don't plan to march or protest about it. They're like pimples. Get rid of one and a handful more just pop up in that place. What good would it do to oust her or any others? More will just fill the void. I'm pretty cynical about politics in the US. They all suck, Dems, Repubs, and everyone in between.

But it's the system we've got, and it doesn't look like changing any time soon.

Still don't like the images. Still not happy with any who use them.

Still pretty sad and upset over this poor woman, and the other victims of this total loony.
 
Press conference on now.

Death toll is 6.

Probable accomplice, still at large.

19 shot.
 
Gabe Zimmerman, an aide to Ms. Giffords who served as director of community outreach, is reported to be among the dead. (Washington Post, Time)
 
What the...?! :eek: Saw this on 99chan's /b/ and wondered if it was some kind of sick joke. Does Palin suffer from some kind of complete semiotic analphabetism? Doesn't rifle sights have violent connotations for her or what? :(
Skeptic Ginger said:
NPR says 6 people died.

I went to hear Patty Murray here in WA and I was shocked frankly at how easy it would have been to do something similar. Murray was 20 feet away and no one was even monitoring who walked in the door. This was only a matter of time given the right wing and Tea Party rhetoric. Even if this was a psychotic schizophrenic and not an idiot who took the right wing lies to heart, it's going to a big shock if the rhetoric is not behind this.
Click to expand...
All things different, it reminds me of the case of "The Laser Man", a disturbed man trigged by the rethoric of that time.
 
Last edited:
slingblade said:
True, and both sides (or more, because there are more than two parties in the US) are wrong to use it. Can we at least agree on that much?

That I saw only Palin's image first led me to wrongly assume that was the only one. And I'll freely admit I don't like her. She's the reason I fell away from caring about politics anymore. Her campaign was the final straw for me. I just don't need the aggravation. I'd like to see her drop out of politics. I don't think she's good for the country, regardless of her party affiliations. But since I control none of that, I just try to stay away from it, the best I can. I have plenty to stress out about, without adding more.

I can happily amend my opinion to say that any politico who uses a map with obvious targets on it, in that manner, has no place in American politics. And I'll state again, that is only my opinion. I don't plan to march or protest about it. They're like pimples. Get rid of one and a handful more just pop up in that place. What good would it do to oust her or any others? More will just fill the void. I'm pretty cynical about politics in the US. They all suck, Dems, Repubs, and everyone in between.

But it's the system we've got, and it doesn't look like changing any time soon.

Still don't like the images. Still not happy with any who use them.

Still pretty sad and upset over this poor woman, and the other victims of this total loony.
Click to expand...

I'm not that much bothered by the images, but more by the verbal rhetoric of both sides.

I'm no great fan of Palin either. I lean to the Right, but I think there are more intelligent and astute Republicans out there than her.

And yes, this whole tragedy is sad.
 
This thread has moved too fast to go back and check everything in the last couple hours. To summarize, it looks like the MySpace and YouTube videos have been confirmed as belonging to the shooter. And those pieces of evidence, plus his age indicate (note, I did not say, prove) paranoid schizophrenia.

There are a few too many politicians and other interviewees in the news calling the guy horrible names. That is a lot worse than those of us condemning the right wing rhetoric that encourages this kind of violence.

I maintain my original position, the rhetoric has the potential to trigger nutjobs. Now I'm sorry for using the noun nutjob myself to refer to people that might include some with serious mental illness. Regardless, of what kind of mental problems a person who reacts to the rhetoric has, and regardless if this shooter was or was not influenced by the rhetoric we are talking about, the rhetoric is dangerous and this incident is an example of why.

Whether this had been a nutjob right winger convinced the Democratic Congresswoman was a threat to his freedom, or if as it appears, it was a person with a mental illness who may or may not have been influenced by the rhetoric, the incident still illustrates the danger of the rhetoric. Like I said earlier, no one is saying the rhetoric would influence a rational person to act in this way. The danger is the rhetoric of constant fear mongering against your political opponent can trigger unstable people to do this kind of thing.
 
sophia8 said:
This is sickening. We don't yet know what the killer's motive was though - maybe he was just aiming to shoot up a supermarket?
However, if this was done from any political motive, then hopefully it will serve as a warning to the Tea Partiers, Palinites etc that they can't keep on whipping up hysteria against their opponents. If this isn't stopped, then the US will get like Pakistan, where you shoot any politician you disagree with.
Click to expand...


In other words, those with whose political opinions you disagree need to shut up, lest some nutcase somewhere be inspired to commit some terrible crime, for which you will blame those who held the opinions that you don't like.

Better if everyone just keeps their mouth shut and quietly, peacefully goes along with your version of how the country should be run.

Perhaps the prediction in my previous post was incorrect after all.
 
MattusMaximus said:
Fog of war indeed. I had heard earlier reports that another suspect had been arrested, or are both true?
Click to expand...
I believe the guy at the press conference said still at large, white, 50s, they have pictures. Calling him a 'person of interest'.

5 were dead at the scene.

It was the 9-year-old girl who died in the hospital.

The sheriff mentioned repeatedly that the "vitriol" on radio talk shows, and on TV, has to be scrutinized as indirect contributors. Also said that Arizona is a mecca of ... cannot remember the word he used. Something like hatred.
 
Last edited:
Dorian Gray said:
Isn't that ironic?
Click to expand...

If by "ironic" you mean "typical" or "hackneyed" when I'll agree.

So many, including the recent press conference sheriff, decry that political speech is so vehement, and blame this as a cause, yet none of these nut-less wonders is willing to propose a solution.

Which of you actually believe that prohibiting/restricting political speech is a solution ? [crickets]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom