RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) Shot At Speaking Event

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said in Philadelphia last night. “Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

No Loughner threats reported before shooting, says Sheriff's Dep't
Posted Jan 11, 2011, 8:26 pm
Dylan Smith
TucsonSentinel.com

No threats made by accused mass shooter Jared Lee Loughner before Saturday's shooting were reported to the Pima County Sheriff's Department, a spokesman said Tuesday.

Prior to the shooting that left 6 dead and 13 wounded, the department was not aware of any threats made to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, any other government official, or to any member of the public, said Deputy Jason Ogan.

The department didn't know about the "Congress On Your Corner" event, and was not asked to provide security for it, he said.

Sheriff Clarence Dupnik was referring to information developed after the shooting when he referenced threats made by Loughner, Ogan said.

"The threats were general in nature, none of which were directed at any specific person, and none were reported to the department," he said.
...

"As we understand it, there have been law enforcement contacts with the individual where he made threats to kill," Dupnik said during a press conference Saturday evening.

Move Over, Palin: NYT's Matt Bai Uncovers New Bogeymen for AZ Shooter, Sharron Angle
By Clay Waters
January 11, 2011

On Sunday, New York Times political reporter/columnist Matt Bai wondered if we are at the start of a “terrifying new” moment in political violence in “A Turning Point in the Discourse, but in Which Direction?” Bai argued that the act of Republican politicians saying standard political things was somehow fueling the rhetorical flames.

He at least appeared evenhanded at the beginning.

• Within minutes of the first reports Saturday that Representative Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona Democrat, and a score of people with her had been shot in Tucson, pages began disappearing from the Web. One was Sarah Palin’s infamous “cross hairs” map from last year, which showed a series of contested Congressional districts, including Ms. Giffords’s, with gun targets trained on them. Another was from Daily Kos, the liberal blog, where one of the congresswoman’s apparently liberal constituents declared her “dead to me” after Ms. Giffords voted against Nancy Pelosi in House leadership elections last week.
  
  Odds are pretty good that neither of these -- nor any other isolated bit of imagery -- had much to do with the shooting in Tucson. But scrubbing them from the Internet couldn’t erase all evidence of the rhetorical recklessness that permeates our political moment. The question is whether Saturday’s shooting marks the logical end point of such a moment -- or rather the beginning of a terrifying new one.
  
  ....
  
  The problem here doesn’t lie with the activists like most of those who populate the Tea Parties, ordinary citizens who are doing what citizens are supposed to do -- engaging in a conversation about the direction of the country. Rather, the problem would seem to rest with the political leaders who pander to the margins of the margins, employing whatever words seem likely to win them contributions or TV time, with little regard for the consequences.
  
  Consider the comments of Sharron Angle, the Tea Party favorite who unsuccessfully ran against Harry Reid for the Senate in Nevada last year. She talked about “domestic enemies” in the Congress and said, “I hope we’re not getting to Second Amendment remedies.” Then there’s Rick Barber, a Republican who lost his primary in a Congressional race in Alabama, but not before airing an ad in which someone dressed as George Washington listened to an attack on the Obama agenda and gravely proclaimed, “Gather your armies.”

Please. Barber’s ad might have been corny, but it wasn't threatening. And if Bai is concerned about rhetoric from politicians, what does he make of this from Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, who said last month that if Congress voted the wrong way on tax cuts, “that it really is time for people in America to take up pitchforks”?

• In fact, much of the message among Republicans last year, as they sought to exploit the Tea Party phenomenon, centered -- like the Tea Party moniker itself -- on this imagery of armed revolution. Popular spokespeople like Ms. Palin routinely drop words like “tyranny” and “socialism” when describing the president and his allies, as if blind to the idea that Americans legitimately faced with either enemy would almost certainly take up arms.

Is "socialism" another word conservatives aren't allowed to use? Newsweek declared “We’re All Socialists Now” in a February 2009 cover story. I don’t recall the uprising.

Bai went on to cite standard political discourse as fueling the fires:

• On Saturday, for instance, Michael Steele, the Republican Party chairman, was among the first to issue a statement saying he was “shocked and horrified” by the Arizona shooting, and no doubt he was. But it was Mr. Steele who, last March, said he hoped to send Speaker Nancy Pelosi to the “firing line.”

Mr. Steele didn’t mean this the way it sounded, of course; he was talking about “firing” in the pink slip sense of the word. But his carelessly constructed, made-for-television rhetoric reinforced the dominant imagery of the moment -- a portrayal of 21st-century Washington as being like 18th-century Lexington and Concord, an occupied country on the verge of armed rebellion.

Bai eventually hinted that yes, President Bush was vilified by the left as well (though the Times never devoted reams of coverage to the prospect of violence as a result).

• None of this began last year, or even with Mr. Obama or with the Tea Party; there were constant intimations during George W. Bush’s presidency that he was a modern Hitler or the devious designer of an attack on the World Trade Center, a man whose very existence threatened the most cherished American ideals.

Might want to reread what you posted bsams. You attacked the sheriff for not acting on something that ended up never being reported to the police.

Sheriff's Department and community-college officials in Pima County are refusing to release a wide range of public documents about the man charged in Saturday's shooting rampage that left six dead and more than a dozen wounded.

The Pima County Sheriff's Department and Pima Community College have declined to release documents that could shed light on run-ins they had with 22-year-old Jared Loughner in the months prior to the shooting.

The Arizona Public Records Law requires that records be "open to inspection by any person at all times" unless officials can prove releasing the information would violate rights of privacy or confidentiality or otherwise harm the best interests of the state.


On Monday, The Republic requested copies of any reports from the Pima County Sheriff's Department involving contacts with Loughner or calls to his house. Pima County Deputy Rene Carlson said her office would not release the reports without a specific date, though this is not required by state statute.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424..._LEFTTopStories

Wow this dude sounds a lot like Snarf before he snapped.

Since the news of Mr. Loughner's alleged role in the shootings broke, members in the public forums of Earth Empires expressed shock that one of their own would take such action, and worried that people would point fingers at the game or the community.

Heyou got fired for not doing inventory one night. It was an ongoing joke here that lasted well over a year. Its amazing how much you miss here while hiding behind all your alts.

You [and] Snarf always were two sides of the same coin, rex. The only real difference seems to be self pity vs impotent rage.

g-tards unite!

Lord in Heaven, you can’t make this up. Yesterday, on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, deposed Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-Mars), called the deliberate and premeditated killing of six people – the Tucson massacre – an “accident.” Specifically, Madame said, quote:

“This resolution is a fitting tribute. It is a great resolution. Please, read it again and again. Carry those names in your heart. Remember, each of these people because, again, a tragic accident took lives, wounded people in the expression of ideas.”

This wasn’t an accident. It was a deliberate shooting. As the debate rages over rhetoric and language, the distinction is important, because language is powerful, and it’s increasingly necessary that we be accurate in our words.

Nancy Pelosi (D-Mars)...

I must say, I'm disappointed.

Sarah Palin was never my top choice. But I felt she could fill out a ticket as V.P., or take some other cabinet position in another Republican's administration, the best-fitting job I think would have been energy secretary. Then she could gradually build up her credibility and run for President in 8 or 12 years.

But THIS move...

To me she just "Ross Perot"-ed herself. Perot was a credible candidate until he couldn't seem to commit to running. And if elected now as President, I could see her saying early on: "Welp, this just isn't for me..." and resigning.
I want a candidate who can commit. She could have just stuck it out for another 18 months as Alaska governor and completed one term, and then she'd have credibility for what she accomplished in her term.

The second thing that's unappealing about her resignation is that she looks weak, and resigned because she couldn't take the heat of political/personal attacks.
I certainly think she was treated unfairly, but, again, she only had to endure it for another 18 months. And she'll still be the butt of an endless stream of harassment lawsuits and late-night jokes regardless. So why not go out in 18 months standing tall ? Her decision makes no sense to me.

For me, it damages her stock.

Again, I like her, but I'm disappointed.
And regardless, Romney was always my first choice anyway. I could picture a Romney-Petraeus ticket in 2012 that could still blow away anything the Democrats could come up with.

He became intrigued by antigovernment conspiracy theories, including that the Sept. 11 attacks were perpetrated by the government and that the country’s central banking system was enslaving its citizens. His anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush, or in discussing what he considered to be the nefarious designs of government.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/us/16l...mgfYK5d56DmiDjg

I think for what's come out on Loughner it's now a point of partisan politics to try to spin him as being one thing over the other. The Doctor was correct in his earlier post.

You're confusing me with bsams and WB. I'm a liberal therefore I am above them and am never, ever wrong.

The Doctor was correct in his earlier post.

You're confusing me with bsams and WB. They've been picking bits out and ignoring what doesn't fit. Loughner didn't like Bush but he thought Giffords was stupid and shot her in the head. I think at this point it's rather foolish to try to paint him as a partisan.

No, there's plenty of proof that you're a tool.

In all honesty, you're the one being overly quick to judgment with your constant attempts to link the guy to right wing extremism.

Yes, I was and am.