Did Obama attack Palin the way she attacked Obama?  Was it even close?  McCain ruined his reputation crawling into the gutter with Palin.  He had to explain to his followers that Obama wasn't a Muslim terrorist, but a decent family man with whom he disagreed largely because of his running mate's incendiary rhetoric.  You can take the ostrich approach (referring to Catera) if you wish, but there is no comparison.

-- Edited by Bogney on Monday 10th of January 2011 11:31:48 AM

So, which one of the people posting here thinks that Palin was a necessary cause of Jared the ****-bag stalker shooting all these people?

Just so I understand with whom I am speaking.

Because of my intelligence, objectivity, education, insight, that is that what you are suggesting, Zooser? :)

A leftist killed the abortion doctor, after a leftist website put up his address and other identifying info? Leftists vandalized Democratic Congresspeople's offices after the health care vote? I don't think so. Those were right-wing violent nutcases.

I would have predicted an attack on Obama prior to Palin or anyone else given Palin's rhetoric and the type of frenzied hate against Obama that she churned up. Of course, Obama's security is much better than that of other politicians.

Zooser - Bill Ayer's is Obama's most elequent voice?  That's absurd.

-- Edited by Bogney on Monday 10th of January 2011 11:23:46 AM

I think it is safe to say that anyone, or indeed everyone, would have predicted a violent attack on Sarah Palin before an attack on Gabrille Gifford based on a history of violent rhetoric. Who here would have put the odds on Gifford being martyred before Palin?

I doubt anyone would.
We do not even need to pause and ask ourselves why.

But the fact is, almost no sane person would try to achieve a political end through murder. Not even the murder of Sarah Palin. So, I feel bad for those that now need to suspend their own good judgment in order to make a political point they could not have made without misusing the tragedy of Congresswoman Gifford. Everyone knows better.

I'm still trying to find evidence that Joy Behar and Sandra Bernhard called for violence against Sarah Palin. Perhaps you can help me out, zoos.

But let's say they did. Neither holds elected office, neither is running for office, and unlike Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, neither has influence over elected officials.

I meant it quickly came down after the shooting - at least that is my understanding. It should have never existed. However, the fact that someone knew quickly after the shooting that it should come down illustrates how a tragedy like this can affect behavior.

Also, did you miss the whole "Abort Palin" campaign?  I just think there is a line that decent people don't cross, and laying blame for a murderous rampage is one of them.
I seem to recall some of the folks on this thread being very careful about hurting feelings after the Fort Hood shootings. 

So I ask again.  If Palin or her family were to be attacked, would you be equally appalled and sympathetic?

If this makes anyone who has alluded to "second amendment remedies"  think twice, then that's a good thing. Personally, I think Sharron Angle's and Joyce Kaufman's comments were the most offensive. The crosshairs poster quickly came down.

Cardinal,

Of course, the real parallel here is the attempt on Reagan's life. In that case as in this one, the shooter was a mentally unstable outsider with no known political affiliations. The exception would be violent assassination attempts like those committed by Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground.

To try to connect the assassination attempts of either Hinckley or this Jared character to any politicians or political groups is to try to use these tragedies for cynical political ends.

To connect people like Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground to a politician or political group is merely a statement of fact.

As for the Weathermen's assassination attempts, I suppose it will come down to how you define assassination. Does the victim need to be a celebrity or just politically connected:

there have been countless calls to violence AGAINST Sarah Palin.

Really? From whom?

Woodwork, if assassination attempts are a constant in American history, how come you have to go back to the Sixties and Seventies to find them? In my childhood (how's that for dating myself) I can remember a rash of assassinations and assassination attempts: JFK, Robert Kennedy, George Wallace, Martin Luther King. The Civil Rights Era was violent. Fringe Vietnam War protesters like the Weathermen were violent as well, though I don't remember assassination being their method. Then we had the Ford and Reagan assassination attempts. But that was a long time ago; in the last thirty years, happily, we've had less political violence. I don't want to go back, and I think you don't either. So the rightwingers need to tone it down.

Cardinal,

It should be clear to anyone, even with only a tepid interest in history, that politicians being shot at, is the historical norm, not exception. From Squeaky Fromme to the latest mentally unbalanced shooter.

A flash from the infamous past:

So, Cardinal, your suggestion seems to be that this was some sort of murder-for-hire. Sarah Palin, or some other of your political hobgoblins, dropped a dime on the congresswoman?

I cannot take that seriously: Truly bringing a gun to a knife fight, as they say.

DonnaL wrote:

---

And although it shouldn't matter, I think it does matter that he is not only Latino (you know, one of those culturally worthless Latinos some people like to talk about), but is also an out gay man active in LGBT causes.  You know, the kind that will destroy the military if they're allowed to serve.

 

---

Now, this is the kind of politicizing I am for. Bravo!

This man is an American hero. That he was openly gay is a good antidote to those that can not see anyone in their gender, sexuality, reilgion, race, etc, as anything more than a bland, dull stereo-type.

I hope the MSM and those posting here focus more on facts like this than the familiar bloviation that typically accompanies the boorish commentary that passes itself off as informed and 'well-meaning' opinion.

 

And, I might add, there is no equivalent desire amongst conservatives to politicize this clearly insane and criminal act of a deranged individual. How many minutes did it take for this national tragedy to turn into a political strategy? These people’s lives have become talking-points.

At the moment, I find this to be the most salient point of all --a true distinction with a difference.

A column I liked that appeared this morning:

http://www.shakespearessister.blogspot.com/

Both sides are, in fact, not "just as bad," when it comes to institutionally sanctioned violent and eliminationist rhetoric.

An anonymous commenter at Daily Kos and the last Republican vice presidential nominee are not equivalent, no matter how many ridiculously irresponsible members of the media would have us believe otherwise.

There is, demonstrably, no leftist equivalent to Sarah Palin, former veep candidate and presumed future presidential candidate, who uses gun imagery (rifle sights) and language ("Don't Retreat, RELOAD") to exhort her followers to action.

There is no leftist equivalent to the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC), a group which was created from the mailing list of the old white supremacist White Citizens Councils and has been noted as becoming increasingly "radical and racist" by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which classifies the CCC as a hate group—and is nonetheless considered an acceptable association by prominent members of the Republican Party, including a a former senator and the last Republican presidential nominee.

There is no leftist equivalent to Glenn Beck, host of a long-running nationally syndicated radio show, former host of a show on CNN and current host of a show on Fox, best-selling author, DC rally organizer, and longtime user of eliminationist rhetoric, including equating universal healthcare to rape, joking about victims of forest fires being America-hating liberals, comparing Al Gore to Hitler, condoning the murder of Michael Moore, accusing Holocaust survivor George Soros of being a Nazi collaborator, joking about poisoning Nancy Pelosi, equating immigration reform with burning US citizens alive, publicly endorsing violent revolution, and winkingly telling his viewers not to get violent, all of which amounts to a speck on the tip of a very big iceberg.

There is no leftist equivalent to Ann Coulter, best-selling author and syndicated columnist, who has been a panelist on Fox's Hannity 28 times and was on Hannity & Colmes an additional 18 times, who has been a guest multiple times on The O'Reilly Factor, Geraldo at Large, Larry King Live, Huckabee, Your World with Neil Cavuto, Hardball, and other cable news shows, has made appearances on The Tonight Show, The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson, The Daily Show, and Real Time with Bill Maher, and has co-hosted The View, and has also said that a baseball bat is "the most effective way" to talk to liberals, as well as: "We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too." And: "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building." And: "In [Clinton's] recurring nightmare of a presidency, we have a national debate about whether he 'did it,' even though all sentient people know he did. Otherwise there would be debates only about whether to impeach or assassinate."

There is no leftist equivalent to Bill O'Reilly, Fox News television show host, nationally syndicated radio show host, and best-selling author, who has appeared on The Tonight Show eleven times, The Late Show with David Letterman six times, The Daily Show six times, Live with Regis and Kelly five times, The View four times, Good Morning America three times, and Real Time with Bill Maher twice, among other national shows, and has lied about and stalked his critics, said that progressive bloggers should be dealt with "with a hand grenade," said Air America hosts were traitors and should be "put in chains," as well as: "And if Al Qaeda comes [to San Francisco] and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

There is no leftist equivalent to Rush "I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus—living fossils—so we will never forget what these people stood for" Limbaugh, nationally syndicated radio show host and invitee to the Bush White House.

There is no leftist equivalent to Pat "Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path" Buchanan, a regular MSNBC contributor and syndicated columnist.

There is no leftist equivalent to Michelle "In Defense of Internment: The Case for 'Racial Profiling' in World War II and the War on Terror" Malkin, a regular Fox panelist, best-selling author, and prominent conservative blogger.

There is no leftist equivalent to Pat "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians" Robertson, host of The 700 Club, who was a guest on Fox's Hannity & Colmes five times.

There is no leftist equivalent to Michael "Howard Dean should be arrested and hung for treason or put in a hole until the end of the Iraq war" Reagan, or Michael "Smallpox in a blanket, which the U.S. Army gave to the Cherokee Indians on their long march to the West, was nothing compared to what I'd like to see done to these people" Savage, both nationally syndicated radio show hosts.

There is no leftist equivalent to the Minutemen and other radical and eliminationist-spewing anti-immigration groups, some of whom have been subcontracted to work the border by the US government.

There is no leftist equivalent to radical and eliminationist-spewing anti-choice groups, who openly target doctors and call for their assassinations—and had a success just last year in the murder of Dr. George Tiller—and whose leaders get featured in whitewashing profiles in the Washington Post.

Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

This is not an argument there is no hatred, no inappropriate and even violent rhetoric, among US leftists. There is.

This is evidence that, although violent rhetoric exists among US leftists, it is not remotely on the same scale, and, more importantly, not an institutionally endorsed tactic, as it is among US rightwingers.

This is a fact. It is not debatable.

And there is observably precious little integrity among conservatives in addressing this fact, in the wake of the attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

Palin takes the absolute cake for audaciously asserting that her rifle sight imagery was really "a surveyor's symbol," and not even having the decency to sheepishly acquiesce that, even if that were true (and not evident bull****), it's understandable how a reasonable person could look at her "surveyor's symbol" alongside the word "target" and get the wrong, ahem, idea. No, it's all just a wall of total denial in the Palin camp, when she's not whining about being a victim herself of people who have the temerity to actually hold her accountable for her carelessly casual violent rhetoric. It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt. And then it's deny and play the martyr.

But it's not like Palin's ideological allies are covering themselves in glory, either. There's no call for accountability, no call for reflection, not among conservatives. Just the usual game of deflection and projection, as they desperately try to find a way to make this liberals' fault.

Bill Kristol took to the airwaves this morning to call criticism of Palin "a disgrace" and accuse liberals of "McCarthyism." Commentators on Fox News, meanwhile, blame President Obama for not changing the tone in Washington, like he promised. Which would be hilarious, were that redirection of blame not a key part of conservatives' strategy to dodge responsibility for the eliminationist rhetoric that certainly contributed to the tragic events of this weekend.

When, a few months ago, there was a spate of widely-publicized suicides of bullied teens, we had, briefly, a national conversation about the dangers of bullying. But in the wake of an ideologically-motivated assassination attempt of a sitting member of Congress, we aren't having a national conversation about the dangers of violent rhetoric—because the conversation about bullying children was started by adults, and there are seemingly no responsible grown-ups to be found among conservatives anymore.

Faced with the overwhelming evidence of the violent rhetoric absolutely permeating the discourse emanating from their side of the aisle, conservatives adopt the approach of a petulant child–deny, obfuscate, and lash out defensively.

And engage in the most breathtaking disingenuous hypocrisy: Conservatives, who vociferously argue against the language and legislation of social justice, on the basis that it all "normalizes" marginalized people and their lives and cultures (it does!), are suddenly nothing but blinking, wide-eyed naïveté when it comes to their own violent rhetoric.

They have a great grasp of cultural anthropology when they want to complain about progressive ideas, inclusion, diversity, and equality. But when it comes to being accountable for their own ideas, their anthropological prowess magically disappears.

Only progressives "infect" the culture, but conservative hate speech exists in a void.

That's what we're meant to believe, anyway. But we know it is not true. This culture, this habit, of eliminationist rhetoric is not happening in a vacuum. It's happening in a culture of widely-available guns (thanks to conservative policies), of underfunded and unavailable medical care, especially mental health care (thanks to conservative policies), of a widespread belief that government is the enemy of the people (thanks to conservative rhetoric), and of millions of increasingly desperate people (thanks to an economy totally ****ed by conservative governance).

The shooting in Tucson was not an anomaly. It was an inevitability.

And as long as we continue to play this foolish game of "both sides are just as bad," and rely on trusty old ablism to dismiss Jared Lee Loughner as a crackpot—dutifully ignoring that people with mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators; carefully pretending that the existence of people with mental illness who are potentially dangerous somehow absolves us of responsibility for violent rhetoric, as opposed to serving to underline precisely why it's irresponsible—it will be inevitable again.

Let's get this straight: This **** doesn't happen in a void. It happens in a culture rife with violent political rhetoric, and it's time for conservatives to pull up their goddamn bootstraps and get to work doing the hard business of self-reflection.

This is one problem the invisible hand of the market can't fix for them—unless, perhaps, it's holding a mirror.

The difference is that it is the radical left that advocates violence, the few Lennonists or Maoist that might be found somewhere. They are truly fringe. The teaparty was bringing guns to Starbucks, to rallies in D.C., and Oklahoma poliicians were talking about calling out the militia. The right wing positon is that everyone should have the right to bear just about any kind of arms they wish. They actually want to literally be able to bring a gun to a fight - the president spoke figuratively, though foolishly. The left position is to ban hand guns and automatic weapons.

Malkin effectively makes my point.  She shows the excesses of radical individuals and fringe groups mostly attacking signs.  Those people are over the top, but they were not elected officials or vice presidential nominees carrying on in that fashion.  They are embarassments to the democrats, not their spokespersons or elected officials.

-- Edited by Bogney on Monday 10th of January 2011 07:34:58 AM

Who is Harry Mitchell? Had anyone ever heard of him before his ad appeared posted here?

Does anyone think that "Targeting red states" is remotely similar to targeting individuals? I don't think anyone suspects that democrates intend to go "nucular."

And, true, there are many fools on both sides. However, the militia rhetoric, the showing up at rallies with guns, and overt calls to violent resistance to government policy comes more frequently and clearly from the right than the left.

A thread from 2010 on some message board with Loughner apparently posting as erad3 with his incomprehensible theories about why the space shuttle flights are faked because space flight is impossible.  This was supposedly one of his favorite Intenet topics; maybe that's one of the reasons he hated Rep. Giffords (because of her husband's being an astronaut and her being on the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread593100/pg1

One of his other Internet names was supposedly "savvys84."  I'm sure people will be combing all of his posts to try to figure out his psyche.

I also read a story that he was also angry at her because at some rally he went to a few years ago, he went to shake her hand and asked her the question "What do words mean," to which she paused and responded with by saying something in Spanish.  Exactly what, I don't know.

More:

http://ccpolitical.activeboard.com/index.spark?aBID=137473&p=41&topicID=40376812

Around the same time, Loughner's behavior also began to worry officials at Pima Community College, where Loughner began attending classes in 2005, the school said in a release.

Between February and September, Loughner "had five contacts with PCC police for classroom and library disruptions," the statement said. He was suspended in September 2010 after college police discovered a YouTube video in which Loughner claimed the college was illegal according to the U.S. Constitution. He withdrew voluntarily the following month and was told he could return only if he met certain conditions, including getting a mental health professional to agree that his presence on campus did not present a danger, the school said.

To his friends, it had been a gradual alienation.

The Loughner they met when he was a freshman at Mountain View High School may have been socially awkward, but he was generally happy and fun to be around. The crew smoked marijuana everyday, and when they weren't going to concerts or watching movies, they talked about the meaning of life and dabbled in conspiracy theories.

Mistrust of government was his defining conviction, the friends said. He believed the government was behind 9/11, and worried that governments were maneuvering to create a unified monetary system ("a New World Order currency" one friend said) so that social elites and bureaucrats could control the rest of the world.

On his YouTube page, he listed among his favorite books "Animal Farm" and "Brave New World" — two novels about how authorities control the masses. Other books he listed in the wide-ranging list included "Mein Kampf," ''The Communist Manifesto," ''Peter Pan" and Aesop's Fables.

Over time, Loughner became increasingly engrossed in his own thoughts — what one of the friends described as a "nihilistic rut."

Loughner, an ardent atheist, began to characterize people as sheep whose free will was being sapped by the monotony of modern life.

"He didn't want people to wake up and do the same thing every day. He wanted more chaos, he wanted less regularity," one friend said.

The friend added that Loughner believed government was trying to get people to accept their meaningless lives so that they would stop dreaming — literally.

He told anyone who would listen that the world we see does not exist, that words have no meaning — and that the only way to derive meaning was during sleep.

Loughner began obsessing about a practice called lucid dreaming, in which people try to actively control their dreams. He kept a detailed journal about what he saw while asleep and tried to get the friends involved.

Several people who knew Loughner at community college said he did not seem especially political, but was socially awkward. He laughed at the wrong things, made inappropriate comments. Most students sat away from him in class.

"He made a lot of the people really uncomfortable, especially the girls in the class," said Steven Cates, who attended an advanced poetry writing class with Loughner at Pima Community College last spring. Though he struck up a superficial friendship with Loughner, he said a group of other students went to the teacher to complain about Loughner at one point.

Another poetry student, Don Coorough, said Loughner read a "kind of a bland" poem about going to the gym in wild "poetry slam" style — "grabbing his crotch and jumping around the room."

When other students read their poems, meanwhile, Coorough said Loughner "would laugh at things that you wouldn't laugh at." After one woman read a poem about abortion, "he was turning all shades of red and laughing," and said, "Wow, she's just like a terrorist, she killed a baby," Coorough said.

"He appeared to be to me an emotional cripple or an emotional child," Coorough said. "He lacked compassion, he lacked understanding, and he lacked an ability to connect."

Cates said Loughner "didn't have the social intelligence, but he definitely had the academic intelligence."

"He was very into the knowledge aspect of school. He was really into his philosophy classes, and he was really into logic and English. And he would get frustrated by the dumbed-down words people used in class," Cates said.

Loughner expressed his interest in grammar and logic on the Internet as he made bizarre claims — such as that the Mars rover and the space shuttle missions were faked.

He frequently used "if-then" constructions in making nonsensical arguments. For instance: "If the living space is able to maintain the crews life at a temperature of -454F then the human body is alive in the NASA Space Shuttle. The human body isn't alive in the NASA Space Shuttle. Thus, the living space isn't able to maintain the crews life at a temperature of -454F."

Loughner also said in one video that government is "implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar." He said described America's laws as "treasonous," said the "every human who's mentally capable is always able to be treasurer of their new currency," and that "if the property owners and government officials are no longer in ownership of their land and laws from a revolution then the revolutionary's from the revolution are in control of the land and laws."

He was obviously a lunatic conspiracy theorist, but I have to say that the one single person who described him as a "liberal" must have meant "libertarian" (or doesn't know the difference).  Because out-there libertarian is what most of those views are, except the space flight nonsense and maybe the anti-abortion views (I have no idea how libertarians view that).  Any reference to "the New World Order" is kind of a big clue that that's where he got some of his nutty ideas.

 

 

 

-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 9th of January 2011 10:23:45 PM

^ It's cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to put him on death row.

Yes, but it's still very expensive to shrink the bejeepers out of him, seek an insanity defense and try him.  Imagine the cost of security alone for this whackadoodle?

I am surprised how the LW websites and blogs are trying to tie this psycho to Rush, Palin, Beck....oh, just name any conservative person in the news.  The LW are definitely showing their vitriol since this tragic shooting.  Saying Palin caused this sicko to shoot Cong. Giffords is akin to saying I killed 2 people in the Safeway parking lot when soccerguy <sorry, saw your post!> cut me off, took the parking spot I wanted, then because soccerguy *made me* crazy mad, I sped off like a lunatic and mowed down 2 people. There, now let's all blame soccerguy for 2 dead people. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. But that's EXACTLY what the LW is messaging!
How can these closed minded libs see this as a blame someone else for this whackadoodle shooter? Are they so clouded in their judgement due to their seering hatred of conservatives?  If so, God help us all.

I can't stop thinking about Gabrielle Giffords, her family and the other victims and their loved one. She has 2 young kids!  They need their Mom!  Why not focus on prayers and good deeds for them, their families and friends instead of wishing conservatives dead.  Would that be so difficult?  Apparently so, it's easier to carry hate in your heart and sit behind a computer screen than it is to actually DO something.


-- Edited by CelticClan07 on Sunday 9th of January 2011 10:21:20 PM

-- Edited by soccerguy315 on Sunday 9th of January 2011 09:14:03 PM

Speaking of the rhetoric in Dallas, Andrew Sullivan posted this today, it's from William Manchester's book:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/01/quot-2.html

Quote For The Day

08 Jan 2011 07:43 pm

"In that third year of the Kennedy Presidency a kind of fever lay over Dallas County. Mad things happened. Huge billboards screamed “Impeach Earl Warren.” Jewish stores were smeared with crude swastikas. Fanatical young matrons swayed in public to the chant, “Stevenson’s going to die–his heart will stop, stop, stop and he will burn, burn burn!” Radical Right polemics were distributed in public schools; Kennedy’s name was booed in classrooms; junior executives were required to attend radical seminars. Dallas had become the mecca for medicine-show evangelists of the National Indignation Convention, the Christian Crusaders, the Minutemen, the John Birch and Patrick Henry societies . . .

In Dallas a retired major general flew the American flag upside down in front of his house, and when, on Labor Day of 1963, the Stars and Stripes were hoisted right side up outside his own home by County Treasurer Warren G. Harding–named by Democratic parents for a Republican President in an era when all Texas children were taught to respect the Presidency, regardless of party–Harding was accosted by a physician’s son, who remarked bitterly, “That’s the Democrat flag. Why not just run up the hammer and sickle while you’re at it?" - William Manchester, Death of a President.

Do we know that his high school kicked him out because of mental issues? Do we know the Army wouldn't accept him because of mental issues? I don't think we know either of those things. The Army has explicitly refused to say why he wasn't accepted-- maybe it was because he has no high school degree.

And the community college only kicked him out after he'd been there for five years. Let's say he is schizophrenic (and c'mon, look at his web pages, this guy is not just a little strange, he's crazy). Schizophrenia develops in early adulthood. He may have been a not-very-bright student (22 and he's studying Algebra? this is not an Einstein) who began to become seriously mentally ill very recently.