Something has been sorely lacking in the discussions on media airwaves over the past few days regarding the recent tragic and senseless slaughter of innocents. Many are attempting to make a case that there is symmetry between left and right in terms of the toxicity they contribute to public discourse. Any such argument is twisted, and founded on denial.

The growing and overwhelming amount of hate groups existing out on the fringe are right wing. We can begin with the still-breathing KKK or its close relative, the John Birch Society movement, and then continue on ad nauseum with a plethora of vigilante groups: American Border Patrol; Ranch Rescue; Civil Homeland Defense; Minuteman Defense Corps; Patriots' Border Alliance; which is to name only some of the groups that exist along the border and which advocate drawing arms for 'protection' from hated others. These, among others (anti-semitic groups, racist groups), and without exception, latched on to the Tea Party Movement. They are all right-wing and tend to support tea party/republican ideas and policies. Without exception they deploy military terms and code words in order to incite their members and followers: 'lock and load' and other Palinisms are common linguistic currency. I doubt seriously that Palin and her advisers have been ignorant of the close overlap between the rhetoric of these groups and the rhetoric she shamelessly deploys.

Definitions of vigilantism tend to stress how individuals or groups take law into their own hands as a means of advancing a specific agenda. However, such definitions tend to be incomplete; for vigilantism also involves infliction of violence OR THREAT OF VIOLENCE, done in an illegal or criminal manner, that conveys an intent to sow seeds of intimidation, fear and terror among those who are the targets of their hate.

Whether the mentally disturbed man who recently killed and wounded so many innocent people was incited by vigilante/right-wing rhetoric misses the point. The point is, that once we look closely at the consistent application of such rhetoric by those who deploy it -- from Tea Bag pols, to vigilante members, to Fox commentators -- it is probably inevitable that more violence will occur. Instead of defending themselves (after the web sites have been scrubbed clean -- a la Palin's gunsights on democratic pols), the right should do everything they can to distance themselves from such groups, pols, and rhetoric. But I am afraid such groups, pols, and rhetoric are now so deeply entrenched in right-wing/republican politics, that there is a dearth of responsible and courageous republicans who will acknowledge the discursive poison and make a stand against it.

This is not to deny that some on the left have used toxic, violent language. This should be condemned no less than that which occurs on a daily basis via the likes of Limbaugh, Savage, O'Reilly, Hannity, and so many others of their ilk who hog radioland. But the point is that toxic, violent language has found institutional life in vigilante hate groups and the pols who pander to their members.

Chet and Jane,

You two (Comment deemed inappropriate by Pleasanton Weekly Online staff)will do anything and take advantage of any terrible situation to further your lefty cause. The killer was a mentally ill individual who smoked pot daily, read Karl Marx, and listening to heavy metal music and kept a dream diary. (Comment deemed inappropriate by Pleasanton Weekly Online staff) Why don't you put as much effort into helping the mentally ill? Volunteer and help someone rather than spending your time on here spewing your hate of the right and conservatives.

Perhaps Chet and Jane should learn to READ. They might learn how the psycho assassin was a far-LEFT whacko, and how the far-LEFT hate speech from Daily KOS identified Giffords as "dead to them" for failing to support Nancy Pelosi.

Liberalism apparently does not require literacy or reasoning.

Jane, your post looks like a cut and paste job from the Daily Kos or HuffPo, inspired by the Alinsky tactics assaulting the airwaves since the weekend.
You occupied most of your post vilifying anyone to the right of the primary shooting victim (making your bias plainly obvious) will giving your leftist comrades are veritbale pass on their targeted verbal aggression over the past several years (too numerous to mention here-but you can find many examples here: Web Link
Your are doing nothing to tone down the rhetoric, in fact you're making it worse. It's no worse now than it has been in the past few years, since Dems took over the majority in Congress.
The folks in 'radioland' you called out, have a huge audience, something leftist radio like Air America could never manage. Would you suppress their 1st amendment rights, as Rep. Jim Clyburn demanded yesterday? Is the the leftist, American utopia your ilk are striving for?

Face it, this coordinated overreation, misdirection and lack of empathy for the shooting victims is typical of the juvenile behavior we've come to expect from Dems, especially after being shellacked in the last election. Get your own house in order before you direct your ire and condescention towards the majority of Americans.

Don't worry Jane. You are right. The right is spinning, spinning, spinning. They will never take responsibility for any of the violence they promote. That's how they work. Project, project, project.

Look how hard they're all working to intimidate you. Typical righties.

What repubs don't realize is when they pander to the lowest common denominator of those in their party, they can't predict the outcome. All this spin is just damage control. Nothing more.

Janna, as a representative of the LCD of the left, who panders to you? George Soros? Saul Alinsky? Karl Marx?
Damage control? For the acts of a drugged out liberal mental case? (I just realized that's probably a redundant description).

Oh, Steve P,

You're so clever. From what I've read, he's stopped smoking pot three years ago. New theory since you can't seem to convince anyone of the old one? There is no one on the left promoting violence. Your heroes, Billo, Beck, Palin, etc. are the only ones doing that. See, we don't need to take cues from insane tv personalities like your side does.

The guy is not a liberal no matter how much you repeat it. I'm sure it won't stop you from trying though. Good luck.

Failing to understand the damage done to our country, society and culture being done by right-wing extremism are missing this wake-up call.

The toxic rhetoric spewing primarily from the right is driving our society in a dangerous direction. This "us vs. them" meme seems to have grown out of the fevered recesses of the last administration and the election of a black President has pushed many over the edge. I think Paul Krugman hits the proverbial nail on the head in his following Op-Ed:

Web Link

Everyone needs to take a step back, a big deep breath, and hopefully calmer and cooler heads will prevail.

How could I have forgotten Steve's biggest hero, Rush! Of course he'll denounce him because he's a druggie right? Steve, you do know that Rush is addicted to hillbilly heroin, don't you?

How about Rachael Madcow and Keith Oberfurher they are two right wingers if I ever heard of some.........



Web Link

According to Politico LOL? Good luck pushing that meme Rita.

The growing and overwhelming amount of hate groups existing out on the fringe are left wing. We can begin with the still-breathing reconquista movement or its close relatives, MECHA and La Raza (the race), and then continue on ad nauseum with a plethora of marxist/communist groups: International ANSWER; Code Pink; New Black Panther Party; STORM; numerous splinter anarchist groups; which is to name only some of the groups that exist all over our country and which advocate revolution and violent protest to achieve political ends. These, among others (anti-military, animal rights and environmental terrorists), without exception, latched on to the Democrat Party. They are all left-wing and tend to support Democrat ideas and policies. Without exception they deploy military terms and code words in order to incite their members and followers: Marxist rhetoric is linguistic currency. I doubt seriously that Obama and his advisers have been ignorant of the close overlap between the rhetoric of these groups and the rhetoric he shamelessly deploys.

Definitions of vigilantism tend to stress how individuals or groups take law into their own hands as a means of advancing a specific agenda. However, such definitions tend to be incomplete; for vigilantism also involves infliction of violence OR THREAT OF VIOLENCE, done in an illegal or criminal manner, that conveys an intent to sow seeds of intimidation, fear and terror among those who are the targets of their hate.

Whether mentally disturbed individuals who have in the past killed and wounded so many innocent people were incited by left-wing rhetoric misses the point. The point is, that once we look closely at the consistent application of such rhetoric by those who deploy it -- from Dem pols, to Daily Kos and HuffPo bloggers, to MSNBC commentators -- it is probably inevitable that more violence will occur. Instead of defending themselves (after the web sites have been scrubbed clean -- a la DLC 2004 congressional election map titled "TARGETING STRATEGY" or dailykos 2 days before she was shot diary post containing the words "Gabby Giffords is DEAD to me"), the left should do everything they can to distance themselves from such groups, pols, and rhetoric. But I am afraid such groups, pols, and rhetoric are now so deeply entrenched in left-wing/republican politics, that there is a dearth of responsible and courageous Democrats who will acknowledge the discursive poison and make a stand against it.

This is not to deny that some on the right have used toxic, violent language. This should be condemned no less than that which occurs on a daily basis via the likes of Olbermann, Maddow, Schultz, Malloy, and so many others of their ilk who hog cable TV and radioland. But the point is that toxic, violent language has found institutional life in hate groups and the pols who pander to their members.

WOW, amazing how that street runs in both directions!!

This tragedy, as we have seen in almost EVERY single assassination or politically related killing in the history of our country, was perpetrated by a lunatic.
To keep on topic, the missed warning signs are pretty well summed up in the Scott Herhold piece in the SJ Merc today Web Link , his parents, classmates, and friends, perhaps the sheriff or other law enforcement and others all missed warning signs that, acted upon, could have averted this tragedy.
One example: how many saw the photo on his myspace with a school textbook and the murder weapon, and knew this troubled person now most likely possessed a powerful weapon?

A poll released today indicates that the majority of Americans DO NOT believe that political rhetoric was the cause of the shooting.

Ironically, this means that Chet/Jane/Janna are now part of the FRINGE that holds beliefs that are contrary to the majority.

Janna/Chet,

Here is a quote I believe is in line with your beliefs.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

By Joseph Goebbels

Good posts, Jim and Parent. Trolls like Jana cannot respond without sounding like school yard children. Maybe that's why they can't stand the fact that adults are now in the majority in the House.
Fringe indeed, not unlike that kid in Tucson.

jimf01,
Not very smart. And not truthful, either. My post was based upon fact. Your post squeezed flagrant untruths into a style format in order to make a cutesy point. There is a qualitative difference between violent, gun-toting vigilante groups that prowl the borderlands looking to terrorize undocumented workers, and students (MECHA) demonstrating nonviolently on campus for civil rights, or code pink members engaging in nonviolent civil disobedience. Once upon a time, the black panthers armed themselves; but democratic pols criticized them for so doing, and today's black panthers are not about guns but rather supplementing inner city childrens' dietary regimens. One can be a Marxist, or a socialist, or a communist, without being a gun advocate or advocating that its members 'lock and load' and 'reload' as a means of violently overthrowing the state. I know of no vigilante groups among those groups you mention on the left. I know of no groups on the left advocating resort to second amendment remedies against the state, let alone against blacks, or jews (American Renaissance), or gays, or new immigrants, or pols.

I've never heard the likes of Olbermann or Maddow or any of the others you mention come even close to saying they want to murder the likes of anyone, as Beck has said about Michael Moore or Limbaugh has said about liberals (though he wanted to leave some around as explary relics). There are no code words in President Obama's speeches that are meant to resonate with vigilante groups (nor with Marxist groups); and I'm certain that you can provide none. In other words, jimf01, you're being untruthful. Do you not know better?

Please continue to scour the internet looking for an occasional lapse in judgment among pols on the left. I've heard Olbermann recently apologize for a past indiscretion regarding his use of language which he later recognized as ill-chosen. I have not heard any right-wing commentators apologize for any of this kind of language that spills out from their networks nonstop 24/7. No, just denial, spin, dissembling. My hunch is that their ratings are so intimately interwoven with vigilante group mentality that any such admission is seen as probably hurting their viewer or listener numbers. One exception seems to be Republican Representative King from New York, who is advocating a law that would prohibit any gun-toter from coming within 1000 feet of a member of congress. Good start. He'd show even greater courage and common sense were he to go on to recommend a similar law that would protect not only congressional leaders (i.e., himself) but all other law-abiding citizens as well: no gun-toter within 1000 feet of any citizen.

The street clearly does not run in both directions as you proudly but erroneously proclaim at the conclusion of your cutesy cut and paste. There is a substantial difference between vigilante groups hell-bent on terrorizing dehumanized others (see Michael Savage) and those who march for civil or human rights; there is a substantial difference between vigilante groups who surround themselves with guns and talk about second amendment remedies to political position takers they disagree with and those who lay down their bodies in the street as an expression of civil disobedience; there is a substantial difference between a president who is willing to go on Fox news during the superbowl in order to civilly engage a lying, right-wing zealot, and a former vice presidential candidate who is afraid to engage any journalist who might be to the left of Katy Couric. Katy Couric! Human and civil rights advocates stand and protest in sunlight; vigilante groups and those who cater to them hide under rocks or reality t.v. shows where their beliefs do not get challenged.

Instead of revelling in your cut and paste fetish, jimfo1, I'd prefer to hear you acknowledge and condemn the kind of hateful, dehumanizing bile that is spewed forth by the likes of Michael Savage and Glenn Beck on a daily basis. I'd prefer to hear you appeal to Palin to never repeat the kinds of vigilante-catering rhetoric she found a need to so hastily scrub from her home page after the tragedy of this week-end.

@ Jane - Well said and thank you.

Jane –

Congratulations on your earliest posting. Chet must have let you know that he was soon to post the topic.

It must have been extremely hard to pack that much left-wing rhetoric in four paragraphs, with a fifth slipped in admitting "left-wing commentators do it also," just to make sure it wasn't too partisan. But, you did it, it was well written, and in a manner that would pass muster with the Pleasanton Weekly "moderators." Good job...!!

It’s simply unfortunate that you must go through life each day feeling as you do about those who you disagree with politically.

occasional lapse in judgment among pols on the left.

Pete Stark, re-elected with 70%+
In 1995, called Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-Connecticut) a “whore” for the insurance industry
Stark lambasted former Bush HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan, an accomplished doctor and medical researcher, as “a disgrace to his race and his profession”
Stark attacked former conservative California state welfare director Eloise Anderson in 1999 as a baby-killer, complaining at a public forum that she would “kill children if she had her way”
Stark physically taunted a fellow Ways and Means Committee member in a hearing during a vote, Stark blurted out: "Come on. Come over here and make me. I dare you. Stark lashed out: “You little fruitcake. You little fruitcake. I said you are a fruitcake.” According to Fox News Channel, witnesses say Stark then hurled a 10-letter homophobic insult that rhymes with lock chucker.
More recently, Stark said the President Bush was sending soldiers "to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President’s amusement"
(he was forced to apologize for that one.

but these are "an occasional lapse in judgment among pols on the left"

I guess more accurately a single pol on the left.

Should I start in on the rest of the Democrats?

Point is, you have given Democrats a pass before even asking me to provide such examples and assuring me there are none.

It doesn't matter that the Scranton Times reported, Ex-Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pasaid this about Florida's Republican Gov candidate Rick Scott: "That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida. Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him."

Somehow I doubt you would fail to mention it in your screed there Jane, if a Republican politician had called for a Democratic candidate to be shot barely a week before the election.

Best piece of wisdom I saw on this whole controversy "The left wants us to debate the proposition: are conservatives responsible for the shooting? It doesn't matter to them what the answer is."

"if they bring a knife, bring a gun" - Barack Obama

"you owe it to everyone to get in their faces" - Barack Obama

"if the Latina community does not stand up to our enemy then that is plan wrong" Barack Obama in a radio address

" George Bush is a war criminal and should be prosecuted and hung if necessary" Olbermann

No one talking here about the role played by the consumer in such hate speech.

jimfo1,
I figured once you were separated from your cut-and-paste fetish that you wouldn't have much, but is this really the best you can muster?

No effort to deny the distinctions I offered between rightist (violent) vigilantists and (nonviolent) civil rights groups on the left? No effort to support your patently false claim that Obama is uttering code words for marxists and socialists? (Why would you lie about that, by the way? Is it not because the right has created a surreal world in which it is permissable to claim, entirely against all facts, that our president is an illegal alien, a marxist, a muslim?) Moreover, you've shown no effort to acknowledge and denounce the preponderance of hate speech coming from left and right, but mostly from the right. How come?

Olbermann has apologized for his call for Bush to be hung as a war criminal; where are the apologies from the right? Beyond that, it must be reiterated for you and those readers who apparently cannot distinguish between argument and hate speech, between lively rhetoric and poorly veiled calls to violence: Olbermann does not pander to armed vigilante groups. Stark is a stupid jerk, and I denounce the kind of language you've cited as evidence of such (even though you've fully established your lack of truthfulness in these matters -- see above). If you are correct about Kanjorski (of whom I have no knowledge), I denounce the kind of language you've forwarded as evidence. Still, these two democratic wackos are just that; they are not pandering to armed vigilante groups whose goal it is to resort to second amendment measures in order to inflict violence against those they have dehumanized. But that is exactly what Limbaugh and O'Reilly, Coulter and Savage, Beck and Palin are doing on a daily basis. You've had to scour the internet in order to find your examples, and, yes, I acknowledge you could find more. But you must realize, the likes of Fox's commentators and the politicians who they've hired as commentators are doing this on a 24/7 basis. They stir their pot of poisonous venom every single day. Barack and Michelle Obama exchanging 'Terrorist fist pumps'? Are you kidding me? Why do you think that a sizable minority in the country (mostly Fox news watchers) believes Obama is a noncitizen and a racist and a marxist and an atheist and a (read: terrorist) muslim. Is it any small wonder that threats to the president are up over 300% from prior administrations?

I've invited you to acknowledge and denounce vigilante groups and the kinds of right-wing pundits', right-wing politicians', and right-wing reality show participants' rhetoric that fuels their zeal. You seem unable to do such. Is this because you are in agreement with them? This strikes me as very sad.

SteveP and Jimfo1,

Your parents,and friends, perhaps the sheriff or other law enforcement and others are all missed warning signs!

More on the political climate in Tucson from the sheriff.

Here's how he put it to Matthews in an TV interview:

DUPNIK: There's no doubt in my mind. Particularly troubled personalities, which is what we're dealing with here, are very vulnerable to the emotion that comes out, especially anger, hate, paranoia, and so forth. And when you were talking about Sarah Palin-- I happen to be a not -- only an admirer and somebody who respects Gabby Giffords, I was involved in her campaign. And you talk about the crosshairs on Gabby Giffords. Well, I want to tell you that her opponent, who was heartily endorsed very vocally by Sarah Palin, had an event, a fund-raising event, where the people were invited I think to a barbecue or something with the -- after the barbecue, if they wanted to, they could each come up and fire an automatic rifle, a semi- automatic rifle. And this same individual had hundreds of campaign ads starting out by saying, Are you as mad at Washington? Boy, I want to tell you, I sure am.

Mary M--the Dem. sheriff is aggressively trying to deflect blame for this incident by attacking anyone who is trying to bring the rule of law back to the Wild West of Arizona.
Had he followed up on all of the complaints and concerns brought to his office regarding this insane 'independent' shooter, this incident could have been avoided.
But, it's much easier to point the finger elsewhere, like the leftists boogey-man of talk radio. They can't control it or the number of listeners who oppose the left's destruction of this country, so they shoot the messenger.
It should be transparent to most educated people what's going on here. They lost big in Nov and now they are using this 'issue' as a fund raising opportunity. See this article about Bernie Sanders attempt to use this tragedy to raise money (no doubt taking Rahm Emmauel's advice)
Web Link

is this really the best you can muster?

The answer is no, it is not, but I am not here to play footsie with you jane. Vigilante groups and right wing everything is not the problem here. As I said, the road runs both ways, and yes, there are many more examples out there beyond Pete Stark.

As you just said, I had to "scour the internet" to find the story about Rep Kanjorski. Actually, I got all my information from one resourceful blogger who cites all of the information on her blog, while you make broad pronouncements against the right without backing up anything you say.

And that gets directly back to my point, which I am making to move the debate forward,a and this is what I would like to discuss with you. Why do you suppose it is that a week before an election a sitting US Representative can say that a Republican opponent should be put up against a wall and shot, and yet you and I, and I dare guess many others knew nothing about it?

This isn't 'eliminationist rhetoric'. This isn't crosshair symbols on a map that can have more than one meaning to some. This isn't use of a word like 'reload' or 'target', that has more than one meaning. This is publicly calling for the death of a political opponent.

It got little notice in the press. Why?

OK, let's turn the scenario around. Let's say 1 week before the Nov 2010 election, Republican US Rep Dan Lungren says the same thing about a leading Democrat candidate for Governor, lets say Abercrombie in Hawaii, just for sake of creating a full picture.

What do you think the reaction would be in the media? Do you think it would be comparable to the reaction to the Democrat Congressman saying the same thing?

Janna and Chet are illogical leftist activists, who use this post to START LIES about anybody right of themselves. PW never YANKS CHET and his lies...but does yank right of center. OBVIOUSLY PWs GINA is a leftist, since she allows Chet's flaming and lies.
John Stewart was correct at his DC rally, when he CALLED OUT MSNBC and Olberman .....previously a sportscaster, then started spouting illogical political opinions. So why is that OK for Olberman ?

Janna and Chet are illogical leftist activists, who use this post to START LIES about anybody right of themselves. PW never YANKS CHET and his lies...but does yank right of center. OBVIOUSLY PWs GINA is a leftist, since she allows Chet's flaming and lies.
John Stewart was correct at his DC rally, when he CALLED OUT MSNBC and Olberman .....previously a sportscaster, then started spouting illogical political opinions. So why is that OK for Olberman ?

Yes jimf01, media ignored sitting DEMocrat US Representative Kanjorski comment "put against a wall and SHOT " about his opponent..just a week before the NOV. election ! Didn't hear about it eh ??? But you have heard about an average mentally ill shooter....how many times in the last 5 days, being twisted into something political. He was LEFT of center, and never read or listened to any news.. The popular Congresswoman is PRO-gun, elected in a Repub district...and she voted AGAINST Pelosi as her minority leader....if anything, it would be more logical for an instant, UNinformed, knee-jerk judgement that a leftist was angry with her for being against Pelosi ! ! ! But, stupid PARTISANs perfer knee-jerk assumptions against anybody right of center. Leftist mentality !! ..but, i guess they know the mental abilities of their kind.

What a bunch of angry, nasty people. Thank you Jane for your thoughtful post. They really just don't get it.

Sarah Palin speaks! Web Link

I just about bust a gut after hearing this tape...tee hee hee, tee hee hee...

It appears that once again the libs are losing the day here. It appears Sheriff Deputy Dog Dumbnik did not do his job. His department was fully aware the guy was a nutjob and did nothing about it, not only that his officers pulled the guy over the morning of the murders. Just goes to show that we need mandatory retirement ages for these senile old guys. The guy is a dumb 75 year old and was probably not real sharp when he was 25. Next issue..........

"they bring a knife and we bring a gun!" Barack Obama, 2009

I'm unclear on what "ooops!" thinks the Sheriff should have done to prevent this from happening. Yes, they were aware of his several run-ins with the law (none of them resulting in any convictions), and of his behavioral problems at the community college (but the sheriff had no authority over making him go for treatment since he hadn't threatened anyone). And on the morning of the murders, it was NOT the police or the Sheriff's department who pulled him over, but a non-police agency, with little authority to detain him themselves, even if there had been some reason to do so, which it says below there wasn't a reason to do so:

"At some point, an officer with the Arizona Game and Fish Department saw Loughner run a red light on a road that runs parallel to Interstate 10 around 7:30 a.m. and pulled over his 1960s dark gray Chevy Nova, authorities said.

The stop was about 6 miles from the Safeway store, agency spokesman Tom Cadden said.

Wildlife officers don't usually make traffic stops unless public safety is at risk, such as running a red light. The officer took his driver's license and vehicle registration information but found no outstanding warrants and let him go.

"All he saw were some fast food wrappers, no black bag," Cadden said. "The officer said he was polite and subdued."

Loughner had a valid license and insurance and the car was registered, agency spokesman Jim Paxon said. "He was warned and released because we had no probable cause to hold, or do an extensive search."

Read more: Web Link

Just an addendum to the above: it seems that "ooops" and some others who are presumably conservatives (based on the Obama quote at the end of his/her post) are implying that the Sheriff should have ignored the laws on the books and overstepped his bounds and exerted additional governmental power over the rights of the individual and put him in an institution or detained him without cause?

How can this double standard apply, where it's ok to do it in some cases, but you'd scream foul in others?

Or is it Wednesday-morning quarterbacking that is making you say that he, the Sheriff, should just have *known* what was going to happen?

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Why What oops, You apparently approve of him 'overstepping his bounds', by NOT acting in a profession measured like EVERY OTHER department in the country. When accting as the INSTANT SPOKESMAN for the department, ethically people usually say NO COMMENT, and investigation will tell us...rather than blabbing instant PERSONAL PARTISAN opinions...NOT waiting to learn that last June a classmate said they were AFRAID and REPORTED to school she was afraid with him in her class !.... or the acquaintaces who said he NEVER listened or watched news ! ! ! SO Whatoops, you defend such knee-jerk instant political profiling. Well, I guess we already knew that from your post....blabbing without benefit of knowledge or facts is OK with you...and you defend SUPOSEDLY FAIR officials who BLAB without any information...just on gut profiles ! Scary

Sorry for the multiples. A bully ' Xfinity ' AD ENCHROACHED and blocked my clicking Submit BOX. I CLICKED , NOTHING happened, waited clicked again, NOTHING happened. etc. DAMN ' Xfinity ' is really BULLYING the MARKET. go away....I don't want Xfinity ! When you push thru, you should lose your license !

It isn't the multiple messages that bother me, Center-Right. It's your inability to offer a coherent thought. Your severe linguistic deficiencies imply strongly an inability to think in a clear and rational manner. Very scary.

This posting is as tacky and inappropriate as that moron police chief in Arizon who decided to voice his personal political opinion when he was supposed to be updating people on the crime that was committed. There is absolutely no link between the evil person who did the shooting and any right-wing politics. It's absolutely absurd that the pathetic liberals try to use this as an opportunity to place blame on the conservatives when the only person to blame is that creepy bald headed guy they have in custody.

I'll try to make it SIMPLE enough for you mickey mouse. It is wrong for a public offical to comment based strictly on personal political partisan profiling.... before any 'criminal profile' has taken place. And, anybody who would try to defend such UNprofessional premature opinions on the airways, is themselves profiling without any facts.

Center-right is mentally left out tee hee tee hee tee hee

loser!!!!!!

Dear Center-right,
The post that I was responding to was this one:
"Posted by ooops!, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, 4 hours ago

It appears that once again the libs are losing the day here. It appears Sheriff Deputy Dog Dumbnik did not do his job. His department was fully aware the guy was a nutjob and did nothing about it, not only that his officers pulled the guy over the morning of the murders. Just goes to show that we need mandatory retirement ages for these senile old guys. The guy is a dumb 75 year old and was probably not real sharp when he was 25. Next issue..........

"they bring a knife and we bring a gun!" Barack Obama, 2009"

Do you see anything in there talking about how "Sheriff Deputy Dog Dumbnik" was speaking out of turn? If you do, then you're a better man than I, 'cause as much as I've scoured it now that you've pointed out my shortcomings in logic, I still don't.

This post, and nothing other, was what I was addressing in my post. I didn't realize this was an incremental argument, that I should have anticipated your next (off-topic) post before posting my last one.

The one person we can count on to understand the situation in Tuscon is the Sheriff. To not listen and understand what he has to say about the situation in his county is a huge mistake.

Violent, right-wing vigilante groups are on the rise. For example, a recent Southern Poverty Law Center report (2010) notes that 'anti-immigrant vigilante groups soared by nearly 80%, adding some 136 new groups during 2009.' These kinds of groups, which 'go beyond mere advocacy of restrictive immigration policy to actually confront or harass suspected immigrants', jumped from 173 groups in 2008 to 309 in 2009. Further, evidence indicates that some of the vigilante groups have metamorphosed into tea party movements whose racial and ethnic targets remain largely the same, only now the targets seemingly have grown a 'head'. As stated on the vigilante Minuteman Civil Defence Corps website: "The Minutemen are returning to the border -- LOCKED AND LOADED to say YOU ARE WRONG OBAMA -- AMERICA COMES FIRST!"

I'll reiterate the point I made in my original post: It is not clear whether this past week-end's crazed shooter in Tucson was linked to the American Renaissance or some other vigilante group. What IS clear is that a persistence of the kinds of vigilante-pandering rhetoric routinely deployed, day in and day out by right-wing media commentators and right-wing pols, is contributing to an atmosphere which increases the likelihood of such kinds of violence in the future. It is no accident that Arizona has indeed become a 'mecca of prejudice and bigotry'; and an absence of condemnation of the rhetoric that has helped make it so makes us all morally culpable the next time around.

Now, Jimfo1, we've already established that you lied in your unfounded assertion that Obama uses code words to inflame marxists and communists. You've either ignored or are incapable of recognizing the differences between (nonviolent)civil rights groups and (violent) vigilantes. Now, I remind you, I've denounced the violent words of Stark and Kanjorski, and I've invited you to denounce the incessant, uninterrupted violent rhetoric from the likes of Limbaugh, Savage, Coulter, Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity, and tea bag queen Palin. Regarding Palin, she apparently felt today that she just HAD to throw some rhetorical red meat to those of her followers who are anti-semitic -- 'blood libel', indeed. You might try comparing her self-obsessed, victim-card-playing, anti-semite fueling rhetoric with that of Obama's thoughtful, heartfelt commentary this evening. You might find it educational. You don't seem to find it necessary to condemn right-wing hate and vigilante groups. I am left to conclude that you must support both right-wing hate speech and vigilante group ideology and action. And so now, after you have clearly exposed your moral deficit to the readers of this post, you attempt to shift the discussion to the tiresome debate about left- or right-leaning media? Weak. But, here, I'll give you another invite: set aside your anger and hate and please join us in denouncing the steady stream of hateful, violence-inducing invective that spews forth from Fox and its affiliates on a 24/7 basis. Please join us in condemning right-wing vigilante groups that have routinely deployed all manner of violent mayhem -- terrorizing threats, intimidations, property burnings, beatings, murders. Trust me, you'll feel morally cleansed once you do this, and all of us will feel better as well. It is the right thing to do.

"Posted by Center-right, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, 5 hours ago

Sorry for the multiples"

18 times?????

unclehomerr..

There's 17 reasons for pweakly to click the redact button.

unclehomerr,
make that 18 reasons for a redact. beyond the disturbing garble, there's the insinuation that police who are sensitive to an atmosphere of hatred and violence their 'precincts' should not be allowed to comment on it. in other words, through all his nonsensical garble, right-center wants to muzzle one of Tucson's top law enforcement officers -- i guess because he's a democrat. go figure.

Hopefully the left, and that includes our stupid but opportunistic sheriff Dumbnik, attempts to take the actions of a mentally ill individual who should have had help and try and turn it into the mantra of suppressing the voice of reason in the country will blow up in their faces like most of the plots do. Obama's long winded speech last night just further highlights why this country is in so much threat from the left. He and they want to destroy this beautiful country and will do anything and everything within their power. Do not be fooled by this ploy, they (the Obama regime) are fully aware that this young man was mentally ill, smoked pot daily, took mind altering drugs, kept a dream daily, was a threat in the Tucson area, and never listening to talk radio or TV of any kind (his former girlfriend said his family was disfunctional and they did not even own a TV). Just another left wing opportunity to try and infringe and remove the rights of the american people.

are you sure there jane? take another look at that splc website, you will see the splc group counts the mation of islam, the new black panthers, and voz de aztlan, apparently all groups that are 'self-obsessed, victim-card-playing, anti-semite fueling' just like the entire right side of the aisle you purport to indict

here is a local example of the right wing hate the splc loads into this report, the league of the south, with apparently a local chapter in Scotts Valley, the description of the group says "By 2004, many of the group’s original founders...had denounced him. At a 2005 strategy meeting, the league struggled to find a handful of interested persons to attend.

have fun flogging that 'vigilante' red herring--it is getting a little stale after 3 days

... how people can listen to the same thing and twist it any which way to meet their agenda.

"Obama's long winded speech last night just further highlights why this country is in so much threat from the left. He and they want to destroy this beautiful country and will do anything and everything within their power."

Most people I've heard and read were calling OUR President's speech a very good one, one which was respectful, appropriately somber, and calling on us all as Americans to set aside petty differences and support OUR country. That doesn't sound anti-American to me...?

As I stated in my first post, "The growing and overwhelming number of hate groups out on the fringe are right wing." According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, there are 16 hate groups located in Arizona: 15 of the 16 exist on the right wing; there are 47 hate groups located in California: 44 of the 47 exist on the right wing. These groups are radical christian gay bashers, neo-nazi skinheads, anti-immigrant, anti-jew, white supremacist, and the list goes on. Their rhetoric is fraught with hate, and they promote violence against those they seek to dehumanize.

Now it seems we must chalk up 'radical' as another right-wing vigilante denier. Rather than acknowledging a sizable problem and its likely propensity to spawn more violence, fear, intimidation among its human targets, 'radical' jumps up and down like a naughty little boy and denies there's a problem: "They do it too!" "They do it too!"

I've already exposed the lies of Jimfo1 after he claimed that the growing and overwhelming number of hate groups on the fringe are left wing, and that Obama uses code words to inflame the passions of marxists. (So, Jimbo, did you seize upon any marxist code words in Obama's speech last night? Didn't think so.) Here, 'radical's' claim -- "They do it too!" -- is not a lie, per se, but is an attempt to distort readers' perceptions.

Please note how so many of the vigilante apologists and vigilante deniers on this thread are unwilling to denounce violence and the hate-filled invective that promotes it. Reading so many of the apologists and deniers on this thread, I think it is only rational for sane citizens to desire stricter gun laws.

Jane,

Your repeated comments about the "right wing" fringe groups neglect the "left wing" fringe groups (PETA anyone). Do you remember the 60's, I do....I also remember the race riots, Black Pathers, etc. So neither side can claim "clean hands". What you fail to acknowledge or respond to (in any of your posts) is that this troubled young man's political leanings were DEMOCRATIC (ie: LEFT). As I recall under Bush, the "left wing". You also assume that someone in the Republican (or Democratic) Party has some power over these "fringe radical fundamentalists" - they DON'T.

On top of it - this man's actions had NOTHING to do with any "fringe" group or anyone's actions but HIMSELF. One of the few things I agree with Ms. Palin on.

I think the biggest issue is the MEDIA, sensationalizing, radicalizing, and dividing by creating and looking for controversies in our politics. As a nation and individuals, we need to stop playing the victim card and stop passing responsibility on to groups and companies. Each person needs to take responsibility for their own actions and choices. It isn't the parent's fault, the college's, the police, or anyone's but the person who did it. Hindsight is always 20/20, and we can always say..."should have seen warning signs". Unless we are going to continue to take away more of our freedoms, there will always be those "loose cannons". We've already created a country where kindergartener's get suspended for bringing a camping knife/fork/spoon set to school...do we really want a country where whenever someone is reported to police as making someone "fear for their life" they have to under go a mental health evaluation? Do we really want a country that limits beliefs (Government is always trying to do this one), right to privacy, right to freedom of choice? This country was founded by those escaping a government who wouldn't let them believe and worship the way they believe.

"I think it is only rational for sane citizens to desire stricter gun laws."

ding ding ding, we finally reach janes agenda

Interesting,

Yes, I also thought it was a very long speech, over 30 minutes, and had a hint of a pep rally to it, but for a moment let's say it was acceptable. Now I believe it is up to President Obama by his actions to show whether he wants to be the great uniter or continue to be the great divider which we have seen over the previous two years. He has come up with more divisive and unclassy comments than any President in my memory. "we won you lost", "they bring a knife we bring a gun", "clinging to their bibles and guns", "you owe it to get in their faces", "they drove the car into the ditch and now as they sit up and drink slurpies and watch us dig it out they want the keys back", "I think everyone would agree that the police acted stupidly", etc. It is up to him to show if he can level up his game to an acceptable level or go down in history as the president who presided over and significantly contributed to the demise of a great country. Leadership and example comes from the top.

Jane,

I have a question for you? Do you think that the bad guys go down and buy a gun and wait for the appropriate approvals? I bet that is not the case.

Add 'minimum wage taxpayer' to the list of right-wingers on this post who refuse to denounce the violence or the rhetoric that motivates it.

We do not live in a society of automaton zombies unaffected by others. To think we do strikes me as delusional (as in calling this past week-end's shooter democratic -- sigh). I was MOVED by Obama's words last night; and I presume you posted here in order to MOVE some of the readers of this post. You are not making sense to say we are not influenced by one another.

This past year three attempts at murder, aborted by law enforcement, were acknowledged by the guilty parties as having been influenced by Glenn Beck. I suppose next you're going to call Beck a democrat? Try to think more clearly, and please join humanity in denouncing (largely right-wing) vigilante violence and the right-wing invective that fuels it.

By the way, guns are illegal in Mexico.........how is that working for them :O)


Web Link

I agree with the sentiment, but I'd have more respect for Jane's desire to have the vitriol of the current national dialog toned down if not for her cheerleading and congratulating of those other posters who write in such a manner just because she agrees with their position. And before she thinks to fit me into her box labeled "Right-wingers" again, I suggest she read into other posts of mine here where I've been considered a left-leaning person by another poster (Jimf01 can even vouch for this).

I attempted to elevate the dialog in a recent thread and focus on the message. It worked for a bit because the response from the other poster was free of such personal language from his earlier posts, but after another post it was met with more personal attacks, which Jane condoned not only by thanking that person, but also throwing in her own two-cent comment about me. Thanks, Jane.

jane one day you may be able to think for yourself and be able to stop parroting last nights MSNBC talking points

Web Link

Peace on Earth.

Amazing. Is the PW now a division of the Daily Kos? Wow. What a shallow and uninformed posting. I would agree that speech and politics could benefit from a dialing down of the retoric on both sides. But in the sad case of Tuscon. We have a deranged individual who didn't watch TV or listen to radio, was a drug user, not engaged in politics but driven by conspiracie, yes, mostly the type of left wing consperices put forth by the movies he watched like Loose Change. My suspicion is he was an anti-semite as well, we have had those since the beginning of time.

If I had to blame someone, it would be this nuts parents who must have turned a blind-eye. And that dumbass Sheriff, who, if he had done his job and charged this nut with a felony, then maybe, yes, he might have been locked up or at the least even in AZ he could not have walked in and bought a gun

I do admit AZ scares me a bit. I go there on business and I fear accidently cutting someone off on the freeway and having my back window blown out because EVERYBODY carries a friggen gun.

"And that dumbass Sheriff, who, if he had done his job and charged this nut with a felony, "

What felony? What could/should the "dumbass Sheriff" have convicted him of, before what happened the other day? Please let us know what felony he committed, since we're all so "shallow and uninformed".

We all should be learning a lesson from how horrible conditions have become in AZ. With all the guns and hate on TV and Radio and then you throw people with guns that listen to this hate you get such conditions.

The sheriff is correct on the Tucson situation and he needs to be listened too and understood. We are lucky the Tea Party nuts in this area have gone back under the rock they came out from under. We should all be proud not a single tea party backed person or Palin backed person won in the last election in our area.

Thanks to Chet for posting this, and thanks to Jane et.al. for drawing out and exposing the mean and nasty and their support of the violent and those who incite them. It has been a very instructive read.

At least we managed to quickly blame this on George Bush. I'm surprised it took a few days.

Liberal statement

Its completely wrong to profile at the airport. Its against our civil right

We must profile every nut job as a right wing extremist completely influenced and controlled by right wing media

We must profile every Republican as a right wing extremist and a possible threat to the US

We can not profile illegal immigrants as criminals. Just because they are currently breaking US law does not mean they have committed a crime (this is the most confusing one to me)

Jane-

I am glad for your benefit we are now living under the crushing rule of Obama and his crew as they slowly strip away our liberties. You are not a self thinker but a sheep...a sheep who must be led. Thus you thrive on being told how to think, where to send your money, how to vote and so on. Your hatred of the right is concerning. The Libs are designed to be compassionate and understanding to a point they will sacrifice their own for others...something you are obviosly not. You are a miss guided and misinformed soul....good luck in life.

Wow, I spend just one day in a day long client meeting & I missed this whole thread? Another reason to go on welfare I guess.

After plodding through the entirety of yesterdays ramblings I think I only caught one or two glimpses of reality & the primary reason why I firmly believe "Jane" is merely a PW troll doing her best to insight class, social, political ideological hatred between otherwise unaffected groups in an effort to simply bolster her own self-hating/loathing world view.

For starters, it has now been reported since at least Tuesday or Wednesday that Jared Loughner neither watched, listened to, scoured the internet for, ascribed himself as, was politically affiliated or influenced by either the far left nor far right or espoused any real affiliation to any political, theological or ideological camp . From what I have come to understand this wack-job was about as much an Anarchist as any political statement could describe but the truth is that in his mind he was a party of one. Long after Mr. Loughner is relieved of his duties on this planet & sent to an eternal appointment in a much warmer than Tuscon environment the debate & study of his mental condition, the events leading to his warped societal view & eventual psychopathic breakdown will consume volumes of text. In reality we are all sane people trying to assign a "sane" excuse, blame or rationale as to why this tragic event occurred. How this thread so quickly moved from a discussion of the inner workings & mindset of a killer to the left vs. right blame game I'm saddened to see but not surprised given the history of the PWTS.

To Jane, Steve P, Chet, Center Right and rest of the lemmings you all should be ashamed of yourselves. For using this event to further your socio-political mantra & further inciting this vitriol you have all accomplished NOTHING to either unify those of us who are simply stunned, shocked & are still grieving over the tragedy & are looking beyond the typical blame-game mentality of who can we either sue, condemn or hang. We are all sane people trying our best to assign sane, rational reasoning to an INsane, UNrational & from all accounts devoid of any social understanding or awareness outside of his own mind of one, mentality. We might as well blame Elmer Fudd for hunting wabbitt, Ozzy Osbourne or Snookie for that matter for deluding this kids brain. Now go back to watching FOX, MSNBC or whatever you trolls do during the day to occupy your time & fill your souls with hate, I'm going to work.

Peace out P-Town!

truth-you can lump Chet in with Jane, as well. I suppose by now I should not be, but I am continually amazed at how they bought the media contrived 'connection' between a crazy loner and anyone to the right of their messiah. Kinda like 'bringing a knife to a gunfight', they come to this forum lacking any personal intelligence, as they parrot their leftist mouthpieces, like the senile and partisan sherrif in Tucson. A fine example of compassion and equality you all are....

Okay, once again the left-wing loons at the PW inject their left-wing loon agenda instead of reporting the news. The fact is the shooter was a nut-job and those that new him said he very rarely watched TV. He has been reported by the media to be a right-wing extremist, yet those that know him say if anything he was a left-wing extremist. The left-wing-loon media has been hammering Sarah Paling for the "targets" on her website, yet the Democrat National Committee has had similar targets on their webiste, President Obama says "if our opponents bring knives to the fight, we need to bring guns", Nancy Pelosi refers to the Tea Party as Nazis, and the recently-elected Democrat Senator form West Virginia had campaign ads showing him actually blasting away with a rifle at legislation he didn't like. So, the left-wing-loon media and the left-wing-loon politicians need to give it up on the "right-wing extremists caused him to do it" load of BS, including the left-wing-loons at the PW.

Again, I ask "Unreal" the question, based on his/her assertion:

"And that dumbass Sheriff, who, if he had done his job and charged this nut with a felony, "

What felony? What could/should the "dumbass Sheriff" have convicted him of, before what happened the other day? Please let us know what felony he committed, since we're all so "shallow and uninformed".

I just don't understand how the law can convict someone of a felony that they didn't convict... unless they are attempting to infringe on the rights of the individual.

Steve,

Well said..stay strong brother.

@ Jane,

Kind of funny for a "right wing" loon to vote for Democrats in the last 2 elections, don't you think? But I did! (well, except for Mr. Jerry Brown - didn't vote for Meg either). Of course I disagree (and denounce) the radical sides of politics that terrorize and see violence as a way to promote their policy....PETA bombing professor's homes, anti-abortionists killing others, and those who want to ban Christian's from teaching their beliefs and Religious Right who endorse protesting veterens funerals. But I also denounce any government policy that would inhibit civil rights of any individual in the US - especially the act of freedom of expression and belief.

Not only should he "not" have inserted his personal political assumptions (so unprofessional AND instigatory!) but WHO and WHERE should have followed up on the status of an individual so mentally challenged that he was kicked out of a public school to protect others? Why is this not reported to some authority as is done with abuse allegations for children?

If the Sheriff wants to spout off and point blame, he ought to look at two things: His department records that log threats made by this kid (that are now off the record), and, How to manage mental health inbalances that are already affecting and on record for the public.

Shouldn't there be cookies at this tea party? There's certainly no shortage of Mad Hatters.

Since the President refudiated many of her statements from this thread while he was down in Tucson, Jane has been pretty scarce, hmmm

To continue with the instruction. It is becoming clear that the right-wing posters on this thread are suffering from mental and moral deficit. They consistently fail to grasp the point I made in my very first post: The lesson to be learned here isn't about whether or not saturday's shooter was influenced by political rhetoric. Rather, the point is that given (1) the alarming growth of right-wing vigilante groups -- 15 out of 16 in Arizona are right-wing, 44 out of 47 in California are right-wing (PETA being neither left nor right) and (2) the steady stream of hate and violence spewed forth by right-wing commentariat and pols, it is (3) inevitable that such poisonous bile will incite violence in the future.

Arizona's good sheriff lamented with heavy heart that Arizona had become a 'mecca of prejudice and bigotry'. He didn't mention left or right. Yet it was uniformly the right-wing that took umbrage. Go figure.

We have indisputable evidence that Glenn Beck's words incited a young man to attempt to assassinate members of the Tides Foundation. Despite some posters' penchant here for citing President Obama's ill-chosen 'they bring knives, we bring guns', it is not republican rallies where the gun toters were found. When Gabrielle Giffords' office was vandalized after her health care vote, she did not say she suspected the left; rather, she raised the disturbing use of bulls-eyes on Palin's website and asked that it be taken down (which it wasn't, until immediately after the shooting, you betcha, wink-wink).

The moral deficiency evidenced on this thread is clear enough. We have the many lies of Jimf01 (who's probably still deciphering Obama's memorial speech, attempting to locate a marxist code word), and, with but one exception who claims to be a democrat, none on the right have offered one shred of indication that they disapprove of vigilante groups; nor do they condemn the violence-inducing rhetoric heard on virtually every radio broadcast of limbaugh or savage or levin, every t.v. broadcast of beck or coulter. It raises the unhappy prospect that the right-wing posters on this thread are not mere 'mad hatters' but rather mad haters who embrace vigilante rhetoric and action. Alas, we are all Arizona.

I'm happy that some contributors viewed our good President's speech. Can anyone even begin to imagine Sarah Palin in that role? There she is, behind the podium, prissing and preening herself, with frequent not so subtle winks to the males in her audience. She really is quite a lady, isn't she?

Jane you truly are a troll of a unique species. You simply cannot stop trying to attach some form of right or any other political bent to the happenings in Arizona. The fact that you are obsessed with assigning the blame to any conservative or right-wing "hate group" only further illustrates your narrow minded & mean spirited world view.

I truly feel sorry for you & may God bless whatever soul you may have left.

We've all met our fair share of "Janes" in the world. The "hollier-than-thou", condescending attitude. The constant passive-agressive argumental tone and the inate ability to use any form of convoluted reasoning to try and prove their point.

While the story behind the mind of this killer is slowly coming to light there continues to be any evidence that would suggest he was influenced by anything that the media or right wing pundit had placed into his head. Jane I would expect you to use this perhaps as a rant for more gun control, better profiling of mental heath issues and funding for the likes, yet you continue to assert your theory that right-wing/conseervative talk shows are to blame.

You seem like an educated person but you are sounding more and more like you have quite a bit morein common with Mr. Loughner than you probably care to.

All they can do is call you names Jane. The don't seem to have any facts at hand , and they are only ranting. they are foaming at the mouth!!!!!!!

Six exclamation points seems to make me think YOU'RE doing some foaming and ranting there Susan. Once again the above posters as well as every report today including MSNBC (I know, I had to watch just to get my blood pressure up) stating the shooters apolitical, nihilistic, lone wolf world view. Oh & now the calls for stricter gun control laws from the left are finally starting surface as they realize the whole right wing attacks are falling apart. Nice try folks, maybe you can try and milk the next national tragedy to your advantage.

So, "A. Morgan" says that "the whole right wing attacks are falling apart".

I do agree. Use your own judgement about how her statement reads.

Here it is Jane, the answer you have sought since the beginning of this thread. You see, my failure to reply and therefore engage on your terms does not mean that any assertions you may subsequently make about me are true. I would never say, for example, Joe blogger or Jane politician has never denounced Michael Vick and his abuse of dogs, Joe or Jane must therefore agree that fighting dogs is acceptable.
It is ludicrous on it's face to make such claims, absent any evidence whatsoever. Let's take another of your claims. You use the Southern Poverty Law Center as your source of information about hate (or specifically vigilantism) in America. The SPLC fails to include The ultra-left, extremely violent Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front in it's list of hate groups. The SPLC is fully aware of these groups, and reports on their activities, but categorizes them separately from hate groups.

This undercuts the claim that 44 of 47 hate groups in California are on the right wing. In fact, it is hatred for other individuals and groups that motivates the actions of these groups.

But the SPLC themselves severely undercut their own credibility, with blog entries like this one Web Link
Subtitled "Keeping an eye on the radical right, it explores the question "Is Jared Lee Loughner...a right-wing extremist? It includes this "Loughner makes extraordinarily obscure comments about language and grammar, suggesting that the government engages in "mind control on the people by controlling grammar. ... I think it’s pretty clear that Loughner is taking ideas from Patriot conspiracy theorist David Wynn Miller of Milwaukee."

Most anyone who has viewed Loughner's videos would simply conclude that he is one of the top loonies in loonyville, but this blogger makes a link to a self described patriot who is pretty kooky himself, a guy who declared himself the King of Hawaii at one point.

Jane's next claim is that "Arizona's good sheriff lamented with heavy heart that Arizona had become a 'mecca of prejudice and bigotry'. He didn't mention left or right. Yet it was uniformly the right-wing that took umbrage. Go figure."

This is a total lie. Quote from Sheriff Dipstick: The kind of rhetoric that flows from people like Rush Limbaugh, in my judgment he is irresponsible, uses partial information, sometimes wrong information, attacks people, angers them against government, angers them against elected officials and that kind of behavior in my opinion is not without consequences.

The fact that Dupnik refrained from pinning blame specifically on left or right for a couple of days matters not, his statements were quite clear. Prior to blaming Limbaugh, Dupnik said “When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government—the anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And unfortunately, Arizona I think has become the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.”
This statement was questioned by a Fox News host, and Dupnik admitted that this statement was “just my opinion” and that when it came to the shooter’s actual motive, “I don’t have that information yet.”

Jane, the big flaw in your reasoning is the laundry list of conservative pundits and blaming them for the purported actions of an equally long list of right-wing groups. Anyone, including me, would agree that 'terrorizing dehumanized others' is wrong, but many of those same people would disagree on your (and SPLC's) definition of what that is. Assisting law enforcement with the apprehension of illegal immigrants near the border on private land is a lawful activity, but you stand on one side and most of the American people stand on the opposite side when that activity is defined as vigilantism.

What has become increasingly saddening to me is the vigilante mentality that pervades so much of the right. There is virtually no difference between the vitriole spewed forth by the likes of Limbaugh, Beck, Savage, Coulter and others I've named and the rhetoric used to justify America's neo-Nazis, white supremacists, Christer gay bashers, and the 'lock and load' anti-immigrant militias that roam the borderlands with loaded guns in search of their prey.

A disappointing but predictable example of this is Jimfo1, who professes to be against those who dehumanize others, but who when he is invited repeatedly to denounce vigilante hate groups on the right remains doggedly and conspicuously silent. For example, instead of condemning murderous anti-immigrant militia groups, he shifts to the false proposition that persons have a right to defend their property from trespass using armed violence if necessary. (I do need to remember that, though; I wouldn't want one of my kids to cut across ol' Jimfo1's front yard.) Oh, and then there's his suggestion that the vigilante militias are merely assisting law enforcement. But, of course, and consistent with the failed moral view that's driving his discussion, Jimfo1 overlooks that law enforcement has stated repeatedly that it categorically does NOT want armed and untrained vigilante zealots taking the law into their own hands. This is what vigilantes do. They think individuals are better able to protect the nation from 'impure' others than is the government; and so they take law into their own hands. They try to soft-pedal their domestic terrorist views and practices with comments like 'we're simply resorting to second amendment remedies', 'we're locked and loaded and taking back our country', and other tea baggerisms. So, invited to condemn a pernicious network of violent, terrorizing, right-wing thugs, Jimfo1 instead likens them to American patriots in armed defense of their property. Like I've stated previously: this constitutes a moral deficiency on Jimfo1's part and the many other screamers on this post who apparently share similar viewpoints.

To the best of my knowledge neither the Animal Liberation Front nor the Earth Liberation Front have an easily categorizable political persuasion. Contrary to Jimfo1's claim (surprise, surprise!), they are not radical leftist outfits. Clearly, they are anarchist groups, and, as is true with most anarchists, they share more with the right-wing than with the left. Both ALF and ELF appear to be equal opportunity bashers of private and state-owned facilities. Close cousins with vigilante groups on the right, they express an extreme hatred of govt; and they attempt to take law into their own hands on the belief that the govt is ill-equipped to save animals or save the earth. My understanding is that they seek to wreak havoc in ways that destroy property without destroying human life. This is an indefensible position, and I strongly condemn it, no less strongly than I condemn Limbaugh's call to kill all liberals (except a few), Beck's flirtatious fantasy to poison Congresswoman Pelosi or his frothy-mouthed wish to kill or have someone kill for him Michael Moore. But the right-wing posters here, after repeated invitation, refuse to join in like condemnation. It is difficult to refrain from judging the right-wing posters here as anything but vigilante sympathizers.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a highly respected, nonpartisan organization. The link provided by Jimfo1 is that of one member of the Center speculating on the possible motives for Tucson's massacre. Given the increasingly hostile environment created by the right wing -- threats against politicians (including Gabrielle Gifford), vandalism of their offices (including that of Gabrielle Gifford), attempts to assassinate members of organizations that are given prominence in Glenn Beck's paranoid fantasies -- it was perfectly reasonable for the author to speculate on the possibility that the shooter was driven by a right-wing vigilante fantasy. The speculative piece struck me as being flawed, but fairly well measured.

Sheriff Dupnik's initial statements emphasized the rise of an increased climate of prejudice, bigotry and violence. He did not point his finger at any individual or agency, nor did he mention left- or right-wing sources; rather, he mentioned, very generally, t.v. and radio talk and movies as contributors to the hostile climate. It was the right-wing echo machine (Fox) that immediately got defensive and started jumping all over the sheriff, which, again, is no small wonder. Again, Jimfo1 has his facts wrong. Being called a liar by a confirmed liar like Jimfo1 does not bother me, as the charge is patently false.

Once again, the right-wing posters here fall back on the apparent fact that the shooter was not a crazed right-winger. Apparently, that is the right-wing vigilantists and vigilante sympathizers' only refrain. They appear to have learned nothing from this tragic event. At the same time, they refuse to acknowledge multiple instances over the past year when right-wing zealots, acting upon the vile violent rhetoric which is now the mainstay of right-wing airwaves, have acted in violent ways. These real, documented instances, apparently don't count for anything. When professed right-wingers kill three cops, this doesn't count for anything. When a heavily armed guy (Byron Williams), frothing at the mouth after listening to Glenn Beck's paranoid rants about the Tides Foundation, acts with the intent to 'start a revolution' by assassinating Tides Foundation members and wounds two police officers by so doing, this doesn't count for anything. I guess to Jimfo1 and other right-wingers on this post, that's small potatoes. Not worth mentioning, I guess; and certainly not worth condemning. I call this intellectually dishonest, deceitful, and indicative of moral deficit. About the only thing they can muster by way of fact is to quote Obama's ill-chosen quote 'if they bring knives, we'll bring guns'. I'm certain Obama regrets using that phrase, and I have no doubt that he would have the decency to admit it. Contrast that with the frenzied denial and dissemblage that we see on the Fox news cable. This said, the fact remains that law enforcement had no problems with lefties arming themselves at political rallies; the problems were all coming from the right-wing militia types.

The great classical conservative Hannah Arendt once referred to the vigilantism she witnessed first-hand in 1930's Germany as expression and harbinger of the 'banality of evil' that was to follow. It appears that here in America, we have the increasing onset of institutionalized vigilantism. The right-wing's see-no-evil position on this matter is indicative of a great deal. It's embrace of the rhetoric that fuels vigilantism and that is frequently used by vigilantists to justify their causes and actions gives ample indication that the Republican Party is being hijacked by vigilantists and their sympathizers. Here we have Jimfo1 sitting on his front porch, locked and loaded, ready to shoot those pesky trespasser immigrants; and if it's against the law, well I guess the (right-wing) individual knows how to enforce the law better than does that darned overreaching regulative state. Just listen to Glenn Beck. He tells it as it is, and he's beyond criticism.

[File under 'You're kidding, right??'

Tucson TV station KGUN.

Shoulda seen it coming!

unclehomerr..

Web Link

This will be my last comment to you Jane, as in your characterization, expressing a few opinions have taken me from a liar making cutesy points to now being a threat to the lives of your children. In my opinion, you may want to see your Dr about increasing the meds, your comments are getting a bit Loughneresque.

President Obama told you in Tucson to change your approach. Let me ask, in private company, have you in the past ever referred to Sarah Palin with terms like "die fundie b***h"?

"At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized--at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do--it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds".

I'm disappointed that jimfo1 must resort to name-calling rather than dealing with argument and fact. The moral deficit that founds jimfo1's discussion leads him to the ridiculous charge that arguments that call for the reduction of violence and violent rhetoric must be tied somehow to someone needing meds. Not very well thought out, I'm afraid. But I doubt that he'd ever dream of saying such a thing about the (formerly?) drug-addicted Rush Limbaugh, whose inflammatory rhetoric has only escalated since the Tucson shooting. In fact, Jimfo1 has been given numerous opportunities to denounce Limbaugh's inflammatory rhetoric, but has chosen not to. The silence is deafening.

In answer to jimof1's question, have I ever referred to Sarah Palin as 'die fundie b***h'? My response: No I haven't.

Last point for Jimfo1: there is a marked difference between spirited argument and violent rhetoric. I trust that most readers of this post can recognize the difference.

Jane is off her rocker. Keep an extra eye on her over the next few weeks.

Observer,
Really. Not. An. Intelligent. Response.

Jane - can't be in the same room as you, the same city, the same state, the same country - you drain the life out of me - not your fault but sorry, must must get away from you while i have the strength.........

I hear you Jane, I especially appreciated the last paragraph in your last long post. I am also sickened by the responses and denial people seem to be having over politicians calling on civilians to "be armed and dangerous". Since when is it ok for a potential leader of our country to create a mock hit list against Senators and Assemblymen? Then to deny the intent as if we're stupid? This type of behavior would never be tolerated by the opposing side- then to play the victim is quite the comical response. If one thing is to come from this we know those who are the real threat to this country, they are openly speaking, publishing and flaunting their message.

Sam, take your blinders off. Both sides created 'hit lists' with targets, etc. You're still trying to lend credibility to the failed messaging last week from Daily Kos and MSNBC. No one beleives you and your militant leftists--check the polls.
Time to move on....you lost in November and no amount of whining and victimization will change that. You can't win the the arena of ideas, so stop the character assassinations---you're wasting our time, while we're trying to undo the damage to this country since the Dems were a majority.

I too am simply drained by this whole exercise. When the post title initially was, "Gabriel Giffords Shooting, the missed signs" I would have assumed that there was going to be a discussion about what led to the tragedy. Alas, no or very little attention was focused on what the shooters motivation could have been. I think we were all a bit perturbed to see this event immediately be hijacked by those who wished to somehow use it as a tool to further their socio-political world view. I'm equally sad & sorry that I bit the bait & dragged myself into three days of wasted bandwidth usage.

In short we are all no better off, more educated or enlightened to the original intent of the thread. For this I can only respond with...

Web Link

Steve, Nosy Neighbors, Rita the Reader, Arroyo, Observer, and all others. Happy Martin Luther King day! He was a great American don't you agree?

Jane expressed her criticism of the rhetoric of violence on the left. Us left-wingers have no problem criticizing violence on the left, because such rhetoric and the violence at its base is not central to our progressive causes.

The Tea Party folks on this thread, though, cannot seem to bring themselves to denounce the rhetoric of violence on the right. Looking at their spokespersons, it is clear why this is so. The rhetoric of violence on the right is central to the Tea Party agenda. It is its essence. To criticize the rhetoric and the violence at its base would amount to a forfeiture of their Tea Party identity. Violence, and the threat of its use, is at the core of Tea Party values.

Martin Luther King was an American of highest moral stature. He had the courage to stand up against and criticize the militant wing of his own black civil rights movement. It cost him his life. This great African-American should be an example for us all.

Speaking for myself, this discussion has been very educational.

You forgot this guy:

One of Obamas buddies who Obama has still to refrudiate and someone who has not disavowed his violent past. Now he is an "intellectual elite" like Jane here.

Bill Ayers
A central figure in the Weathermen, Ayers lived underground for ten years, an experience he wrote about in his memoir, Fugitive Days. Now married to Dohrn, Ayers is currently a school reform activist and a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

And what happened to the "peaceful" black panthers who were intimidating voters at the polling station in the last presidential election....why did that case get dropped by the Obama administration Jane?

All rhetoric of violence is un-needed, but to claim it as only Rightie Teabaggers (very intellectual term). And that people call those Tea Baggers racist (the single most offensive accusation)?

Moral Highground....Jane? Have you read the American Constitution Jane? Sounds like your "Constitution" is referred to as a Manifesto...I hear if you hop in an intertube you can be surrounded by more of your buddies in Cuba in a very short float. I'll pack your lunch...

Monopoly on hate,

And a Happy Martin Luther King Day to you as well. Pleased to see you are willing to state at least that all rhetoric of violence is not called for. That's real progress.

You've criticized Bill Ayers. Care to criticize someone's violent rhetoric on the right? That would be a really progressive step in the right direction. Oh, come on, give it a try.

Now I don't want to come off as an intellectual elitist like you say Jane is, but the word you use - refrudiate - is nowhere to be found in any dictionary. The term I think you were probably looking for was repudiate, or perhaps refute? Refrudiate sounds like trying to return someone to the (mis)user's own fruitcake status or something.

Let's at least join together in common celebration of the birthday of one of America's greatest heroes, Martin Luther King. Surely you don't detect anything 'Cuban' in that, do you?

Oh Chris...Chris Chris Chris

MLK was a great man...dont forget what party Lincoln was from. Individual freedom is a hallmark of the Republican Party.

Also, there are plenty of whack jobs on both sides. I think the two that I pointed out on the Left are of particular interest as they represent very current and under-reported issues. Oh, come on, give it a try. Tell us about them...there motives...there statements...

I'll report them to you again:

1) Obamas relationship with Bill Ayers and what Bill Ayers stands for? And how could we let this guy educate our kids?
2) The poling place and the Black Panthers...why were the charges dropped for no reason?


PART 2
The left wants to keep the people dependent on Government as a means to stay in power. More Government services..delivered in the most inefficient possible way.

I think the spectrum used in current discourse of "Right" vs. "Left" is completely inaccurate. In fact, the discourse is more appropriately described as Big Government vs Small Government...Facism, Totalitarianism, Communism, Solcialism are all "Big Government" ideas. Republics and Democracies are Smaller Governement ideas...it is clear where many posters on this board fall.

Tea Party people want to restore a Small Government agenda and go back to the Constitutional Republic that this what this country started as. They want decentralized power delivered closer to where the citizen lives. They are deathly afraid of Facism, Totalitarianism, Communism and Socialism....as they should be.

History is filled with examples where countries collapsed in this shift from smaller government to more government control. The very first sign of this collapse is run-away budgets and out of control spending and the re-allocation of wealth by the government as opposed to hard work and free markets. That is why the Tea Party didnt like Bush either....he was fiscally irresposible.

History is filled with what happens in the aftermath of the concentration of power and an over dependence of the people on Governemt...Stalin, Lenon, Hitler (Yes Hitler...he was a Big Government guy too and all three were terrible racists). This is what people are afraid of. These were big reasons for the founding of our Country in the first place. Overly intrusive government, taxation without representation, a new government structure to protect the little guy (House vs Senate and the electoral college).

It doesnt make Tea Partiers bad people, or ignorrant, or racists, or haters...and certainly not Tea Baggers (a term created by a very ignorrant Hollywood star). It makes them as American as any other American and deserving of repsect. To bash them and charectorize them as a bunch of right wing, ignorrant, two tooth, racist haters....stirs frustration and anger because these people believe in the values that this country was founded on and that many have given their lives for....now go back and tell us about Bill Ayers and where he stacks up in this spectrum....


As a side note: Your condescending vocabulary lesson is typical...forgive any typos in the future. Now go read your history books...you've got alot of catching up to do.

Monopoly of hate,

"there are plenty of wack jobs on both sides" and "MLK was a great man"

More progress for you. This is good. It must be hard for you, I realize. But you're getting there. Still unable to name and criticize a single instance of violent rhetoric coming from the right, eh? Keep trying.

Now Reuters continues the political correctness idiocy!

"A college dropout opened fire on a crowd gathered for an event by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona on January 8, killing six people and wounding 13 including Giffords."

He was a college 'kickout'... not dropout! The police were called to the campus 5 times and finally the college obtained a restraining order to keep him off campus.

I'd certainly call that a warning sign.. but, what do I know?

unclehomerr..

Chris

Comment back when you graduate from High school. In the mean time...read up on History...get to know the facts and embrace them.

Monopoly on hate:

If you desire to earn the respect of members of your audience, you might begin by spelling r-e-s-p-e-c-t correctly. The multiple spelling errors and grammatical failings throughout your posts are indicative of bad reading skills, and hence bad thinking skills. I'm tempted to repair your erudite sweep of history for us, but instead I'll simply start where you did. You are right (applause!), Lincoln was a Republican ... back when being a Republican stood for human decency. Then came along the Civil Rights Movement, and then Civil Rights Laws, which were ushered in primarily by Democrats. (Lyndon B. Johnson, upon signing the Civil Rights Act, predicted that his (Democratic) party's endorsement of the act would hurt his party for the next couple of decades.) His prediction was wrong; it hurt his party for the next 5+ decades, and it continues to do so as the red states with high education scores, like Mississipp and Oklahome and Louisian, continue to vote primarily Republican. Go figure! After the Civil Rights legislation, many of the kkk-supported Dems in the great American South switched parties in order to maintain allegiance with their racist constituents. Which is why you find so few Dems today in that great bastion of racial tolerance, the South. I'd go on to give you a history lesson, but it would take several lectures to repair. In the meantime, suffice it to say that Chris has pretty well established your moral cowardice.

UncleHomerr,
I found your linked 6-second video an apt display of your inability to articulate much else but venom. But in all honesty, I've got to tell you, I found the video to be absolutely hilarious. Thanks for some levity. I laughed so hard I almost wet my drawers.

right-wing extremism!

Chris, Jane, Chet, and other leftists, You should have tuned in CNN yesterday of some of the SUNday shows, they had about 8 Psych doctors on for serious, intellectual discussions....SO I suppose you missed them. Doctors all said this was totally, clearly a case of mental illness and major discussion ensued about the big problem in our country is the inability of doctors to correctly identify and treat mental illness. Ignorant lawmakers have written stupid laws like HIPPA, and many more, that put up a wall to identify and treat the ill earlier. OUR standard procedure is first family incident,maybe at 14 or 17, but doctors and courts dont' let you DO anything, then a bigger second event at 18 or 22. SO, for prevention do you lock up young people for their thoughts ? LABEL them so they'llk never get a job in their lives. Are you capable of offering and intelligent suggestions. Such a big, difficult problem. Oh, because of our medical world not being able to ACCURATELY diagonse mental illness earlier, then lets write MORE gun laws that can't be enforced (Oakland and crooks will ALWAYS have their guns, regardless of any laws)...but it FEELS good to write them. Should the schools report and 'lock up' youths, for doctors to 'watch' and MISdiagnose " . You seem to have all the answers, so I guess you don't think about, much less engage in THOUGHTFULL discussions, in a search for solutions.

Chris,

I agree that Dr. Martin Luther King was a great man and an inspiration to many.

Arroyo

So Jane...no comment on the Big Government aspect of my post? Just blather how people in the south are stupid racists?

I admire the human rights accomplishments of both parties. I view The New Deal as an absolute disaster in social engineering. Social Security as a ruined program because Beaurocrats could not keep there hands off the money.

Freedom from the oppression of Government run by know-it-alls like you...is a civil right. People like you think they know better how to run peoples live and take away their self-reliance and replace it with reliance on Government.

Instead of addressing the Big Government points that I made, you chose to critique grammar...

Leftist activists are so desperate and SO obvious....desperately trying to make a tragic situation into something 'political'. So many Dems are USING this tragedy to 'raise money'...that in itself is a tragedy. If only they were bright enough and objective enough to engage in discussing the reality of the situation. I guest you are so incestous in only engaging in real conversations with other leftists, and just name call those center/right.
Across the spectrum, which is my method, all objective experts clearly know this was another mentally ill psycho that hadn't been treated or properly diagnosed yet. MISSED by our medical experts !! So many are MISSed and/or MISdiagnosed. So ignorant people avoid what they don't know or understand, or FEAR they could have a family member that needs evaluating. SO let's pretend, and ignore, and change the conversation....pretend it's about guns, and name call the people you want to beat in the next election. Yes, that's the smart way to deal with this tragedy....that's what any coward would do.

I wonder what is actually being DONE today to accomplish the reduction of vitriol in national discourse aside from fomenting more vitriol by shaming people?

Stacey

The left is going to use this unrelated incident to get something "DONE" for example:

Increase government control over radio and TV through something called the fairness doctrine which would facilitate granting the left additional airtime on the radio and TV that they cannot earn through providing entertaining and meaningful content. See ratings of MSNBC and Air America.

They will also try to increase government control over speech, by limiting free speech, a fundamental right in the constitution (unlike privacy). The government will now tell us what we can and cannot say.

Sounds kinda like China who recently mandated that many publications must be written in Chinese and cannot contain English phrases...or Venezuela who recently expanded things that you cannot say that "distract" government officials from carrying out "the peoples" business. This is on top of the already repressive government controls in place.

I guess free speech is only free is your saying something that the left agrees with. Where is the ACLU when you need them?

Well, Stacey, I think Jane and Chris went pretty far towards an attempt to reduce the vitriol when they denounced violent discourse of both right and left. Didn't Jane denounce violent left groups and the violent discourse of some Democrat politicians? But it seems those on the right side of the spectrum are having difficulty finding anything wrong with the discourse of Glen Beck or Anne Coulter and the nest of other serpentine talkers on Fox.

Chris makes a good point. Maybe their identities are intertwined with Beck and Coulter and other poison-tongued television personalities. A good first step would be for them to denounce the poison-tongued ones and then maybe perhaps expurgating the poisonous parts of themselves. Just a suggestion.

Mickey

I denounced the violent discourse of both the left and the right. But all you guys talk about is the right...and dont even acknowledgs people like Bill Ayers who is a close friend to Obama who did more than talk about violence he blew up and attempted to blow up buildings...and says he wished he did more...now he teaches education in our school system...OMG.

The Black Panthers that were physically intimidating voters during the Presidential election. They were arrested only to have the charges quietly dropped.

The point folks are making...or at least that I am trying to make... is the hipocracy involved and the lack of balance. Notice that Chris and Jane focused on grammar and not the point being made. Violent speech and hateful speech are equally offensive in my book. And factless speech is blabbering.

Is that action or something more akin to putting a bumper sticker on the car that says "Free Tibet" and then sitting back?

"Jane, you ignorant.." no wait. That's another show.

Jane.. I didn't link to a 6sec video.. I linked to an MS/NBC news story. If you clicked again, on that page, there's no telling what you saw.

My point was, [and the title of this discussion is 'Missed Warning Signs']. a tv station.. named KGUN-TV.. should have been a warning sign.

Someone with your advanced psychic abilities should have picked up on that. You certainly seem to understand 'everything' else.

unclehomerr..

Calm down, Stacey, you'll work yourself into a stroke or something.

Outing yourself as the far right-winger and Tea Partier I always said you were, eh?

Thanks for the assist!

By the way...I denounce the "Jane you...." comment too... sorry unclehommerr

Janes ramblings however take both sides of positions at once...just like most "People Like Jane" (PLJs)

Even though Jane correlated my spelling errors (from fast blog typing) and poor grammar to having a below average IQ (which happens to be above 140). Within that very post she had plenty of spelling and grammar errors herself...meanwhile Jane and Chris (a PLJ) ignored the key points of the posts...That big government is not the solution ...but the downfall ...and history supports this view. Violence and vitriol in speech is meaningless...our country has had a very violent beginning and several violent chapters to defend our values and our constitution (which PLJs dismiss as an outdated document).

"Give me Liberty or give me death" one of the most famous quotes in the history of our republic...a perfectly honorable statement by one of our greatest forefathers! Put that in the context of the "shock and awe" reactions to talk show hosts.

What does that mean?

Its a simple window into the mind of PLJ who are probably pretty smart, but miss the context of their emotional views of feeling good about what they say and its' "moral superiority". It does feel good! It does seem cool...but it completely misses the FACT that the world, and human kind, just doesnt work the way they want it to. Look around you...what we have here in America is special...its unique...its fantastic. Why ruin it with ideas that have been tried and failed at the cost of millions of lives.

Jimf01,

Excellent and very true. It is not by chance or bad luck that Ca. is in such a mess. It is our over abundance of fruits and nuts!
Now the Fort Hood shooting was just a lone lunatic or frustrated individual but Arizona was the right's fault! Makes perfect sense.

For those interested in intellectual discussions with Psych docs, go to CNN.com, and hear some of the challenges of dealing with diagnosing mental illness in our young adults.

I think I read that schizophrenia usually starts showing symptoms in the early twenties! This sick person is surely schizophrenic. Didn't one of this crazies parents work for the sheriff of Pima County. It is a shame no one followed through on their concerns about his scary behavior. Maybe this horrible occurrence could have been prevented!

jane is right. the tea baggers here fail to realize she has exposed a gaping moral hole in the body of their self-righteous chest thumping beliefs. unable to track her argument if their lives depended on it, they scream, change topics, and scramble to save face. my word, i've never before witnessed such a pathetic spectacle. there isn't an intelligent one in the bunch. if there are any young people reading these sputterings, there's a lesson to be learned: go to school kids. you've been given a host of exellent examples of what you'll sound like if you choose to drop out.

Remember Walter the "j" in Jane is always capital and the first letter of the first word of each sentence is also capitalized. I guess you think of yourself as an intelligent one!
The left are the most immature and vicious. You prove my point by calling this group tea baggers! I am not a tea party member but I think you are the tea bagger! And why is tea bagger not considered questionable content?

Yes, Walter, I think my arguments have clearly illuminated an ugly moral failing at the base of much that passes as right-wing ideology these days. Many who now stand on the right are vigilantes, vigilante supporters, vigilante apologists, or vigilantes-in-waiting. They support hate speech and the violence that it precipitates. Confronted with an opportunity to condemn the violence-condoning hate speech, which has increasingly become one and the same with conservativism or Republicanism, they pass. This includes a sizable stable of right-wing commentators, many members of which have found a home at Fox News. None of these commentators has acknowledged the hatred and the will to intimidate and terrorize the targets of their hate speech. Like so many of the contributors to this thread, their silence will have made them complicit the next time violence flares up. And with the non-diminishing hatred and invective being honked out by the right, there most certainly will be violence.

We have moved forward after a prolonged and ugly episode of slavery in this country. Those who supported slavery were defeated, and the nation attempted to move on. But every generation or so, a new variant of those who would seek to deny the humanness and human rights of others crawls out from under a rock and expresses itself as a new variant on 'freedom'. There are photos of the ugly crowds at the end of the 19th century that assembled up and down the West Coast, murdering and terrorizing Asian Americans to the point that most felt compelled to leave the country. Those vigilante crowds consisted of real people, hurt by a recession, consumed with hatred for a scapegoated newly arrived host of immigrants, and were convinced that the state was out to hurt them by extending to those immigrants basic rights. Those vigilante crowds beat, whipped, and hung Asian Americans in the name of 'freedom'.

That same mentality was evidenced with the Ku Klux Klan. The state, argued the Klan, was oppressing good white people when it attempted to ensure a basic slate of human rights for black folks. Their argument translated into widespread lynching. Photos still exist which show the ugly crowds smugly looking up at a human being dangling at the end of a rope they had strung over a tree limb and tightening around his neck. These so-called patriots, feeling oppressed by a state that sought to integrate public schools, fanned out through neighborhoods in their communities in an attempt to inflict terror on black people and their children. There are photos that still exist which show these so-called patriots forming human gauntlets, waving their fists, and spewing venom at young children on their way to school.

We saw the same ugliness from all those on the right who were against legislation of laws that were designed to extend civil rights to those who for centuries had been denied personhood, even in our enshrined constitution. Although the Civil Rights laws in the 60's have become a 'given' in this country, it is important to remind ourselves of the ignorant, hateful, bigoted, violent resistance those laws encountered. At the forefront of the resistance were such groups as the KKK and the John Birch Society. The state has gone too far, these groups bellowed. The state is oppressing us. But sane and rational people knew better, and many young college students, potential 'intellectual elitists', went into the south in order to provide solace to the terrorized, to help organize them against the ugly popular and institutional racism they faced.

The hatred and violence subsides, usually after strong state intervention is needed, but then, usually in rough economic times, it percolates to the surface once again. It has raised its ugly head recently with anti-immigrant sentiment, and even more recently with anti-muslim sentiment. The ugliness takes the form of words that incite to violence, such as church burnings and mosque prohibitions and synagogue defacings. When Michael Savage routinely refers to immigrants from the third world as being from the 'Turd World', he is suggesting to his lathered up audience that immigrants are less than human; that they deserve whatever hate-group-inflicted violence is directed at them because they are dirty and they stink. Today, Fox News watchers are awash in the hate speech of Beck and O'Reilly and their guests, and they boast of how the station of hate is watched by more viewers than any other cable news show. Beck knows that his audience will find it cute when he fantasizes killing Michael Moore or having one of his watchers do the job for him. Claiming to be proud, high-I.Q.'d boob-tube watchers, they suffer no embarrassment whatsoever in repeating to anyone who will listen that Fox News has more boob-tube watchers than any other cable network. (Somewhere they perhaps realize that those liberal 'intellectual elitists' are not glued in front of the t.v. but are reading, and are raising kids without a television set in every (or any) room of the house.)

Vigilante violence, and the thought and speech that sustains it, is still with us today. Since President Obama's election, threats against the President have arisen over 300%. The ugliness is still out there. John McCain, after some initial stumbling, finally stepped forward during his campaign in an effort to stave off the ugliness. The photos and videos did not lie; the throngs of haters at his rallies, and especially those of his running mate, were sizable and ugly. He disappointed many of them when he claimed he did not think Obama was a Muslim. His running mate consistently failed to acknowledge that Obama was anything but a Muslim terrorist. She drew the ugliness to her rallies; she pandered to it; her words incited it. The right-wing propaganda network happily conveyed the hatred and incitations to its morally stunted viewers.

On this post, not a single right-wing contributor has acknowledged their dismay that their President is being threatened. Not a single right-wing contributor has acknowledged or expressed their dismay at the profusion of vigilante hate groups that have been springing up since Obama's election. Not a single right-wing poster has registered any condemnation of the hate speech that is routinely being produced on the right-wing radio and television networks. Others on this post as well as I have all but pleaded for them to do so. But, no, there has only been denial, deflection, and rationalization. Why? Because the right-wing posters here are one and the same with Southern lynchers and health clinic bombers and minority bashers. They are awash in a sea of violent, hateful invective that is intertwined with talk of gun rights and patriotism and taking the country back. Hold up the mirror to yourselves, and you'll see an unmistakable resemblance to the photographed vigilantes of old. Despite liberal America's best efforts, the hatred still crawls out from under any given rock. Morally denounced as KKK, its members and sympathizers simply change their name to patriot minutemen groups. They fill the Tea Party rallies that are advertised and incited (this is well documented) by Fox News. The hatred coils up and spews its venom until liberal America again asserts itself by condemning the ignorance and bigotry that attempts to pass itself off as 'taking back this country'. Jimfo1, after my denunciation of his moral deficit, was sent slithering back under his rock; no doubt he'll again reappear under some other 'patriot' pretense.

The great classical liberal thinker, and intellectual father of libertarianism, John Stuart Mill, argued passionately for free speech. Even when the hateful and ignorant are honking out their ugly noises on the public square to the point that they embarrass us before our children, we must continue to let them honk. But it is the duty of good citizens to step forward and morally denounce the ignorance and hatred in hopes that the violence in all its ugliness will abate, if only somewhat. Martin Luther King, after Frederick Douglass perhaps the nation's greatest American, took Mill's words to heart. He passionately criticized segregationist policies and the hatred and bigotry that was at its base. But he was no less critical of those on the left whose words promoted or condoned or gave a free pass to violence. He realized his words had to have a sound moral foundation if they were to find genuine traction within the American public, and within his own conscience. He realized that hatred and calls to violence can have no sound moral foundation. And so he courageously stepped forward and clearly denounced those even among his own brotherhood and sisterhood who were unwilling themselves to separate themselves from the verbal flame-throwers in their midst. The vigilante sympathizers on this thread might learn a good deal from Martin Luther King. But alas, they will not learn it glued to the boob tube immersed in the loughner-like thought streams running from the mouth of a Glenn Beck. 'Ah', you rightists say, 'but that's where the ugliness is, and I feed upon it.'

"If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" - Alexander Solzhenitsyn

to paraphrase Jane

let me summarize for y'all--unless you are a open borders advocate, pro-amnesty,anti-gun, pro-abortion, 100% obama agenda supporting MSNBC watcher--then you are incapable of higher thought, and you are just the same as every single person throughout history who has ever had an ill thought or failed to denounce anyone who ever had an ill thought towards anyone not like them

OMG, the left wing-nuts are still spewing their malicious vermin about the tea party or conservative media being the cause of the Tucson tragedy. The shooter's friends and family have said:
1) He didn't listen to talk shows or talk radio
2) His political thinking was liberal
So, left wing-nuts, give it up! Quit you disgusting attempt to gain some political advantage over this tragedy. Your motives are disgusting!

My Oh My, what a bunch of hate in little ol' Pleasantown. Who's right (no pun intended) if everybodys wrong?

Jane,
Why don't you spend some of that extra time you seem to have and write Loghner a letter c/o the Pima County Sheriff. I'm sure he would appreciate your rants -- kinda like one nut to another, because we're not buying what you're selling.

So glad Gabrielle Giffords is recovering so quickly!

Now from the left: A far left activist, James Eric Fuller, who was unfortunately shot in the knee by Loughner rants to the New York Post as follows:
Some Conservatives should be tortured and an ear necklace made with Palin's, Bachmann's and Dick Cheney's ears among others. Was he encouraged by left hate speech like the that of the Sheriff of Pima County,Keith Olbermann and Paul Krugrer.
Now that is hateful and how uncivilized!

They just don't get it Jane, or else maybe they didn't even read what you wrote. How quickly they just turn to insults, leaves me to infer they do not disagree with the turn society seems to be escalating lately.

Have you read this article about the integration policy in one school district? Your last post made me think of it. Web Link

Still waiting for a response to this one...

Posted by what ooops?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jan 12, 2011 at 7:45 pm

Dear Center-right,

The post that I was responding to was this one:

"Posted by ooops!, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, 4 hours ago

It appears that once again the libs are losing the day here. It appears Sheriff Deputy Dog Dumbnik did not do his job. His department was fully aware the guy was a nutjob and did nothing about it, not only that his officers pulled the guy over the morning of the murders. Just goes to show that we need mandatory retirement ages for these senile old guys. The guy is a dumb 75 year old and was probably not real sharp when he was 25. Next issue..........

"they bring a knife and we bring a gun!" Barack Obama, 2009"

Do you see anything in there talking about how "Sheriff Deputy Dog Dumbnik" was speaking out of turn? If you do, then you're a better man than I, 'cause as much as I've scoured it now that you've pointed out my shortcomings in logic, I still don't.

This post, and nothing other, was what I was addressing in my post. I didn't realize this was an incremental argument, that I should have anticipated your next (off-topic) post before posting my last one.

The right-wing Tea Partiers on this forum are telling us a lot more about themselves than they realize. These folks (my good friend Stacey included) are so eager to score points against some mythical lefties that they aren't even pretending to care about--

Six people murdered by Loughner (including a nine-year-old girl!) with a type of ammo clip that was BANNED under President Clinton and then made legal again under President Bush...

...as well as 19 people wounded, including Congresswoman Giffords.

But I'm sure that Stacey would agree that the real victims of the shooting are self-pitying, self-righteous right-wingers like Sarah Palin and Stacey, the Sarah Palin wannabe.

Palin, like Stacey and the other Tea Partiers, has confused calls for civility with calls for censorship. The two are not synonymous, but they are, as always, foaming at the mouth and too busy biting ankles to actually sit down and *think* about these awful events and what they really mean.

No one with any sense has attributed DIRECT responsibility for these shootings to the hateful and violent political rhetoric used by Palin and the Palinistas, but there is an indirect link. Loughner is a schizophrenic, but, contrary to popular myth, schizophrenics are not usually violent.

"there is a definite link between Loughner’s assault and the Tea Party and Conservative media rhetoric; it’s just the nature of that correlation that seems to confuse some people. The salient point is not found in asking how their rhetoric might have influenced his actions; it’s in asking why his insane actions reflect and illuminate Tea Party and Conservative media rhetoric.

This tragic event is precisely how a 2nd Amendment solution is achieved. The democratic will of the people is undermined with the attempted assassination of a Congresswoman; the rule of law and judicial dampening of political passions with the death of a federal judge. This precise link of meaning to event doesn’t allow the Tea Party or the Conservative media manipulators who created and encouraged them to divorce rhetoric and actions from the cold, ugly reality of their threats -- both direct and implied -- whether acted upon or not."

Source: Web Link

"The American people, though, may be losing patience with Palin. A Gallup poll commissioned by USA Today after the Tucson controversy found that Palin's rating is at its lowest level since she burst onto the national political scene in September 2008. She is seen in a favourable light by 38% of US voters, while 53% have an unfavourable view.

Another poll, for the Washington Post and ABC, found that 30% of voters approved of Palin's remarks after the Tucson shootings, while 46% disapproved. President Barack Obama, in contrast, had a 78% approval rating for his handling of events."

Source:

Web Link

By the way, the dead nine-year-old girl's name was Christina Taylor Green. Nine years was all she got on this earth, because of this nation's insane fetish for guns, guns, and more guns.

p.s--Sorry for all the non-Fox News sources. I know a lot of you don't get your "information" anywhere except from Murdoch's propaganda machine.

go one more graph down that article, to where conclusions start being drawn by the salon author

Put simply, because the Conservative media cannot remain silent, their only two options are business as usual -- deflect, draw false equivalencies, create phantom culprits -- or honesty: "Look! An insane man just did what we said we might do if the elections didn't go our way."
The only problems are 1) WE didn't say anything of the sort, if the salon author was trying to take the '2nd amendment remedies' comment and make that a conservative or even a tea party position, that's ludicrous

and 2) err, the elections DID go our way, with Angle being a notable exception

the false equivalencies in this thread, imo, are all drawn by one person, Jane

So, nothing to say the parents of the nine-year-old girl, "radical"?

Nothing to say to the little girls' friends, her neighbors, her teachers, her grandparents?

Nothing to say at all?

Says *everything* about you.

Yet another Pleasanton teacher,

You seem to ignore some of the horrible things some liberal say. How could you blame this on anyone other than Loughner himself. Did you miss the fact that a liberal activist James Fuller is in custody for threatening to kill some one and suggesting that a necklace of human ears should be made? This information was made public during an interview with the New York Post. If someone is that crazy how do you know what set him off. How awful to blame innocent people for this terrible incident. Everyone is responsible for there own actions. What should be gleaned from this is how to know what warning sign should prompt action that will hopefully keep this from happening again.

Teachers I hope you are keeping your personal political views private and out of the classroom!

The posts of today are some of the most scary things Ive ever read...because they come...I think...from my neighbors. Do you guys actually believe the S*%t you are writing? The depth of ignorance is impossible to measure.

Violent rhetoric has occuurred throughout our history! Most of it is tied to passion not real intent. From both sides!!! There are times when things get a bit out of control that the line between passion and reality get blurred ...but really? Back to the campaigns of Adams they talked about how people would be raped and murdered....this is not new...this is not different. The hateful things said about Bush and Reagan were aweful!!! now the left gets sensitive...are you serious? You are so completely, and grossly wrapped in left wing BS and over sensitivity....GOOOOOOOOODDDDDD!

Wake the heck up!!!! You are soooooo disconnected with reality...soooo comletely self-absorbed....such victoms....such patsies....you so represent the democratic party and you sooooo represent everything that is wrong with those still left in power. And it will be soooooo good to wish you and McNearny and Pelosi and Reid GOOOOOODDDDDD BYYYYYEEEEEEE!!!!!

Go AWAYYYY you cry baby weenies. Leave our schools...you are stupid. Leave our government...you have no clue. Leave our state.... that used to be wonderful until you took control.... Go away ...please go away...in peace...just go away and take your entitlement mentality with you....save us from you!!!!!

That's right! Monopoly of Hate has nailed it! There's always been violent rhetoric, just like there's always been violence. If African Americans hadn't been such patsies [?], he could still own some as slaves. If the state hadn't been such patsies [?] he could still be a celebrant at lynching parties instead of tea parties. He could be his violent hate filled self without any wimpy self absorbed liberals challenging him. He could laugh with impunity when a bomb is planted at a MLK parade. All these crybaby minority groups. What are we to do with them????? They won't go aaaawwwwwaaaayyyyy!!! If it weren't for that darned overregulating guverment, we could use our guns to chase them away. Cry baby weenies don't deserve to live here anyway. Gooooo Awayyyyyyyy!!!!!

Yes, by all means, read Monopoly of Hate very closely and follow his thought processes. And then be afraid. Be very afraid.

These comments have run their course. Thanks for posting.