Merged Rep. Giffords Shot In Tucson

[BeAChooser]

I didn't hear anyone booing Gov. Brewer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/us/13assess.html?_r=3

Even as it began, some conservative commentators were posting comments criticizing the memorial service for being overly partisan and more like a pep rally, and there were some boos in the hall when Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, spoke. Those reactions would have been hard to imagine, say, in the days after the Oklahoma City bombing.

.

You'd better go back and re-read the thread, BaC, because you will see quite clear evidence that I spent much time & frustration in admonishing my fellow liberals in their leap to conclusions.

Well in that case, I apologize for adding your name to that list.

 

[babycondor]

...

And whether you know it or not, "Together We Thrive" is a political statement. Unity has been this administration's theme over and over since day one. But unity isn't really what this administration has desired. And democracy thrives on difference and division.

…

You assert, "Unity has been this administration's theme."

Then you assert: "But unity isn't really what this administration desired." You imply that what the administration really desired was difference and division, right?

Then you say:

"Democracy thrives on difference and division."

So by your own logic, the administration wants democracy to thrive, right?

Be that as it may, rather than "difference and division," I believe democracy thrives on an informed populace, free to express their differences (hopefully in a civil manner), to participate in free and open elections, and upon leaders who are held accountable for their words and actions.

 

[ProbeX]

Right but he didn't act on it until afterwards, and the vitriolic rhetoric filled the airwaves, and where he was is called the mecca (ground zero) of it all.

That doesn't mean Palin specifically inflamed what was lying dormant in him. But he was clearly a political activist. I can't believe he wasn't plugged into the vitriolic political rhetoric all around him.

All this goal post moving is problematic. One person on this thread was trying to connect Ron Paul' s "currency" rhetoric to this crazy guy's actions. Then when that argument proved weak, she pretty much returned to, "Yeah, but there IS tea party rhetoric out there that could incite ... blablablah."

And even though the tea party rhetoric theory is now being largely replaced by the fact of Loughner's threats toward Giffords from back in 2007, you and a few others are still going to try and make a weak ex post facto case for the tea party being at fault.

Priceless. Gotta love partisan politics.

 

[BenBurch]

BAC clearly does NOT want Democracy to thrive, unless that means that only people who agree with him are allowed to vote.

 

[ProbeX]

The letter was written in 2007. By what means was it determined that the death threat was also scrawled in 2007?

Ask the forensics officials who collected and examined the evidence.

 

[MattusMaximus]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/us/13assess.html?_r=3

Well, I didn't hear any booing, but there was a helluva lot of cheering. But in case there was booing, it was a probably just few jerks who likely got quieted down very quickly, as they should have been.

Why do you insist upon dwelling on the few bad apples as examples of "the majority of liberals"? This kind of skewing of reality is the very source of the problem in our political discourse. The talking heads on the right have convinced so many people that "this is what a liberal is", and it sells, sells, sells and makes a lot of money for them.

I might ask the same question of my liberal brethren regarding conservatives and a similarly distorted view they have via various media outlets on the left.

Well in that case, I apologize for adding your name to that list.

Apology accepted.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

May I suggest that you try not to constantly focus on the negative regarding conservatives? As a liberal myself, I understand much of what you're saying here, but I know too many fair-minded conservatives to convince myself that they're all so easily painted with this broad brush.

Physician, heal thyself.

I don't believe for a minute that the majority of conservatives are anything less than normal people with moderately conservative views that are probably a lot closer to mine that you would guess. For speaking out I get painted as some uber liberal here and that couldn't be further from the truth.

It's the propaganda, Karl Rove and Frank Luntz's marketing, distorting of the truth, and the followers of this sly messaging that I'm so often speaking about on this forum. I want people to notice the trickery, for example the fear mongering in this case that has a purpose of getting people to believe false things.

It does make me look like I'm negative, of course, that is the point of that messaging, anyone who points out the lies is calling them names. [Feigning outrage called for here].


And look how successful the message has been. The conservatives have successfully gotten many liberals to believe the false equivalency. Luntz and Rove trump the progressive message once again.

 

[ProbeX]

Oh puhleese. There are countless examples of people taking this kind of vitriol to heart and acting on it. ...

List them here.

Oh and you still need to provide evidence for your earlier claim. If you can't site APA studies, some other reputable organization is a good starting point. Somehow I think you're avoiding this reasonable request.

Meanwhile, you didn't prove anything with those insane ramblings of Loughner's. You did use the word "suggestive", as in you feel some of his rhetoric is "suggestive" of tea party rhetoric. Not good enough. This isn't about what one of us or some of us sees in the piece of burnt toast.

 

[Noztradamus]

The saddest thing here is that the right chose not to say 'We never intended anybody to take our words as a cause for harm, and if they did, we are filled with remorse' but instead to take the rhetoric to another unseemly level.

So the saddest thing is "the right" won't plead guilty to the wild accusations made by "the left".

 

[ProbeX]

At least get straight what I've said. ...

Right, well I understood what you've been saying but frankly it's mostly unrelated, tangential, bipartisan rhetoric that cannot be in any way verified as being the cause of Loughner's homicidal behavior.

It seems pretty clear that Loughner's illness is the cause of Loughner's homicidal behavior.

Now you imagine I'm attacking the APA?

You've written off the APA as not good enough in terms of you citing research to back your sweeping claim, which rests squarely in the field of psychiatric and behavioral studies. What I'm noticing is you continue to resist providing evidence for your claim.

 

[BeAChooser]

You assert, "Unity has been this administration's theme."

Then you assert: "But unity isn't really what this administration desired." You imply that what the administration really desired was difference and division, right?

No, not at all. Here's what the Obama administration means by "unity":

http://townhall.com/columnists/Denn...obamas_calls_for_unity_are_not_what_they_seem

Sen. Obama's Calls for Unity Are Not What They Seem

… snip …

If those who call for unity told the whole truth, this is what they would say: "I want everyone to unite -- behind my values. I want everyone who disagrees with me to change the way they think so that we can all be united. I myself have no plans to change my positions on any important issues in order to achieve this unity. So in order to achieve it, I assume that all of you who differ with me will change your views and values and embrace mine."

… snip …

It is fascinating how little introspection Sen. Obama's "unity" supporters engage in -- they are usually the very people who most forcefully advocate multiculturalism, who scoff at the idea of an American melting pot and who oppose something as basic to American unity as declaring English the country's national language.

And democrat's actions vis a vis Arizona and immigration are a good example of how the calls for "unity" really only disguise an insistance that we all agree with the liberal positions on immigration. Then there's health care, public education, the war on terror, etc., etc., etc.

 

[I Am The Scum]

No, not at all. Here's what the Obama administration means by "unity":

http://townhall.com/columnists/Denn...obamas_calls_for_unity_are_not_what_they_seem



And democrat's actions vis a vis Arizona and immigration are a good example of how the calls for "unity" really only disguise and insistance that we all agree with the liberal positions on immigration. Then there's health care, public education, the war on terror, etc., etc., etc.

You're pretty terrible.

You were criticizing others for capitalizing on the tragedy with political messages. It turns out the message is not original to politicians, so that's out. And even then, the message is one of unity, which by it's very nature cannot be a partisan ideology. You attempt to work around this issue by assuming that when he says "unity" he actually means something else. I presume you have discovered this through the application of mind-reading.

But then you weren't done. Your post wasn't finished until you capitalized on the tragedy with political messages. Your invocation of a months-old immigration debate as though it is the slightest bit relevant to this tragedy is quite absurd.

You are a hypocrite.
You are a failure by the very standard you have set.
You are a fine example of everything wrong with American politics.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[babycondor]

Culture of Violence

Quoting SkepticGinger:
But can the incessant "fear the government" campaign tactic also increase the likelihood such an unstable person will act out their paranoia? Yes.

Where are your APA-approved studies to back this assertion?

"Research on violent television and films, video
games, and music reveals unequivocal evidence that media violence
increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior
in both immediate and long-term contexts." http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/pspi43.pdf

Incendiary political rhetoric is part of the culture of violence in which we are all steeped, arguably to the point of being numb to it or failing to recognize it at all.

You may not be able to draw a line of direct causation from Palin's crosshair graphic, Angle's "second amendment remedies," the "fear the government" rantings of Beck and Limbaugh, and the homicidal actions of Loughner, but it is reasonable to assume that he is influenced by them.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01/027503.php

People should be perfectly well aware that there are unstable people in our society with easy access to guns. These disturbed people are vulnerable to suggestion and in search of ways to express their paranoia.

Knowing that, right wing luminaries continue to use inflammatory language and symbolic actions that will sooner or later find the right "carrier". But they then disclaim any responsibility for the outcomes they work so hard to create.

The right wing media machine exists because it works. It reaches millions of people and they absorb the messages they're fed. It uses media and the tools of media to spread its message of hate, fear, blame, and violence. It deliberately creates "the other" and actively foments resentment and anger against "the other".

And http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/11/AR2011011105685.html

American politics and culture have a rich history of paranoia, as historian Richard Hofstadter and many others have documented. Many of the incidents of anti-government violence over the past couple of years -- flying a plane into an IRS building in Texas, shooting police officers in Pittsburgh and carrying out last weekend's savagery in Tucson -- came from people who, however individually loony they may have been, also harbored paranoid visions of the government that resembled, though by no means entirely, those put forth by the Becks and the Ericksons.

That doesn't make Beck, Erickson, Rupert Murdoch and their ilk responsible for Tucson. It does make them responsible for promoting a paranoid culture that makes America a more divided and dangerous land.

 

[TraneWreck]

List them here.

-- July 2008: A gunman named Jim David Adkisson, agitated at how "liberals" are "destroying America," walks into a Unitarian Church and opens fire, killing two churchgoers and wounding four others.

-- October 2008: Two neo-Nazis are arrested in Tennessee in a plot to murder dozens of African-Americans, culminating in the assassination of President Obama.

-- December 2008: A pair of "Patriot" movement radicals -- the father-son team of Bruce and Joshua Turnidge, who wanted "to attack the political infrastructure" -- threaten a bank in Woodburn, Oregon, with a bomb in the hopes of extorting money that would end their financial difficulties, for which they blamed the government. Instead, the bomb goes off and kills two police officers. The men eventually are convicted and sentenced to death for the crime.

-- December 2008: In Belfast, Maine, police discover the makings of a nuclear "dirty bomb" in the basement of a white supremacist shot dead by his wife. The man, who was independently wealthy, reportedly was agitated about the election of President Obama and was crafting a plan to set off the bomb.

-- January 2009: A white supremacist named Keith Luke embarks on a killing rampage in Brockton, Mass., raping and wounding a black woman and killing her sister, then killing a homeless man before being captured by police as he is en route to a Jewish community center.

-- February 2009: A Marine named Kody Brittingham is arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate President Obama. Brittingham also collected white-supremacist material.

-- April 2009: A white supremacist named Richard Poplawski opens fire on three Pittsburgh police officers who come to his house on a domestic-violence call and kills all three, because he believed President Obama intended to take away the guns of white citizens like himself. Poplawski is currently awaiting trial.

-- April 2009: Another gunman in Okaloosa County, Florida, similarly fearful of Obama's purported gun-grabbing plans, kills two deputies when they come to arrest him in a domestic-violence matter, then is killed himself in a shootout with police.

-- May 2009: A "sovereign citizen" named Scott Roeder walks into a church in Wichita, Kansas, and assassinates abortion provider Dr. George Tiller.

-- June 2009: A Holocaust denier and right-wing tax protester named James Von Brunn opens fire at the Holocaust Museum, killing a security guard.

-- February 2010: An angry tax protester named Joseph Ray Stack flies an airplane into the building housing IRS offices in Austin, Texas. (Media are reluctant to label this one "domestic terrorism" too.)

-- March 2010: Seven militiamen from the Hutaree Militia in Michigan and Ohio are arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate local police officers with the intent of sparking a new civil war.

-- March 2010: An anti-government extremist named John Patrick Bedell walks into the Pentagon and opens fire, wounding two officers before he is himself shot dead.

-- May 2010: A "sovereign citizen" from Georgia is arrested in Tennessee and charged with plotting the violent takeover of a local county courthouse.

-- May 2010: A still-unidentified white man walks into a Jacksonville, Fla., mosque and sets it afire, simultaneously setting off a pipe bomb.

-- May 2010: Two "sovereign citizens" named Jerry and Joe Kane gun down two police officers who pull them over for a traffic violation, and then wound two more officers in a shootout in which both of them are eventually killed.

-- July 2010: An agitated right-winger and convict named Byron Williams loads up on weapons and drives to the Bay Area intent on attacking the offices of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, but is intercepted by state patrolmen and engages them in a shootout and armed standoff in which two officers and Williams are wounded.

-- September 2010: A Concord, N.C., man is arrested and charged with plotting to blow up a North Carolina abortion clinic. The man, 26-year--old Justin Carl Moose, referred to himself as the "Christian counterpart to (Osama) bin Laden” in a taped undercover meeting with a federal informant.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/independents-day.html

That's just in the last couple of years.

There's also this:

 

[BeAChooser]

Your invocation of a months-old immigration debate as though it is the slightest bit relevant to this tragedy is quite absurd.

The thread's author noted that Palin attacked Giffords for her stance on immigration. So how can you claim that has nothing to do with this?

 

[babycondor]

No, not at all. Here's what the Obama administration means by "unity":

http://townhall.com/columnists/Denn...obamas_calls_for_unity_are_not_what_they_seem



And democrat's actions vis a vis Arizona and immigration are a good example of how the calls for "unity" really only disguise an insistance that we all agree with the liberal positions on immigration. Then there's health care, public education, the war on terror, etc., etc., etc.

If you look at Obama's record since taking office, he has NOT insisted that we all agree with his administration's positions at all. He has compromised with Republicans (to the dismay of many of his supporters, and going against some of his campaign promises, I might add) on many issues, including health care reform, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the closing of Guantanamo, and extending the Bush tax cuts.

I think we've strayed off topic here.

 

[I Am The Scum]

The thread's author noted that Palin attacked Giffords for her stance on immigration. So how can you claim that has nothing to do with this?

It's disgusting that you think this makes things better.

You claim to know this is wrong, and then you engage in the behavior. You are proving my point:

You are a hypocrite.
You are a failure by the very standard you have set.
You are a fine example of everything wrong with American politics.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[BeAChooser]

It's disgusting that you think this makes things better.

You claim to know this is wrong, and then you engage in the behavior. You are proving my point:

You are a hypocrite.
You are a failure by the very standard you have set.
You are a fine example of everything wrong with American politics.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

You are right. I've allowed myself to be dragged down in the gutter with them. So I shall rise above it and let them say whatever they want, without response. And we'll see how that turns out.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

List them here.

Oh and you still need to provide evidence for your earlier claim. If you can't site APA studies, some other reputable organization is a good starting point. Somehow I think you're avoiding this reasonable request.

Meanwhile, you didn't prove anything with those insane ramblings of Loughner's. You did use the word "suggestive", as in you feel some of his rhetoric is "suggestive" of tea party rhetoric. Not good enough. This isn't about what one of us or some of us sees in the piece of burnt toast.

I don't have to cite any of this just because you've declared that is what is needed.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

"Research on violent television and films, video
games, and music reveals unequivocal evidence that media violence
increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior
in both immediate and long-term contexts." http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/pspi43.pdf

Incendiary political rhetoric is part of the culture of violence in which we are all steeped, arguably to the point of being numb to it or failing to recognize it at all.

You may not be able to draw a line of direct causation from Palin's crosshair graphic, Angle's "second amendment remedies," the "fear the government" rantings of Beck and Limbaugh, and the homicidal actions of Loughner, but it is reasonable to assume that he is influenced by them.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01/027503.php



And http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/11/AR2011011105685.html

"Culture of violence" is not equivalent to "incessant "fear the government" campaign tactic".

I'm sorry you are wasting so much time arguing against straw men, but it appears it was satisfying for you.