I just thought it was too early to decide one way or another Hybrid. That's hardly backtracking.
The doctor called me out for leaving it an open question as to what Loughner's political affiliation right after the shooting. If something had come out like he was a big Olberman or Beck fan that would have changed the situation to me one way or the other. Instead we have a registered indy who didn't vote who may have not liked Bush but thought Giffords was stupid and shot her in the head.
I'll agree you didn't come right out and say that he was GOP, you took time to find a little more info from your rather liberal sites but with the articles you post and things you'd written it does seem you were leaning him that way. Hard. You have a way of implying things without actually saying them
The doctor called me out for leaving it an open question as to what Loughner's political affiliation right after the shooting.
Revisionist history is great, isn't it, MEM? I called you out for saying that he was a right wing extremist. You tried to use G-language to saying that you didn't, but it's obvious to anyone who reads this thread that you did.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
Ah the one sided ref returns. Doctor I made it pretty clear that I was leaving it open because it was too early on Loughner. On the other hand some folks here are still pushing their partisan talking points.
Ah the one sided ref returns. Doctor I made it pretty clear that I was leaving it open because it was too early on Loughner. On the other hand some folks here are still pushing their partisan talking points.
Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Quote:
Arizona shooting suspect may be linked to anti-Semitic group From: NewsCore January 10, 2011 12:41AM Increase Text Size Decrease Text Size Print Email Share Add to Digg Add to del.icio.us Add to Facebook Add to Kwoff Add to Myspace Add to Newsvine What are these? THE suspect being held over Saturday's shooting of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords may have links to anti-Semitic race hate group American Renaissance.
An internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memo quoted by FOX News Channel revealed the gunman - named by the media as Jared Loughner, 22 - is "possibly linked" to American Renaissance.
The group subscribes to an ideology that is "anti-government, anti-immigration, anti -ZOG (Zionist Occupational Government), anti-Semitic," according to the DHS memo.
Giffords "is the first Jewish female elected to such a high position in the US government. She was also opposite this group's ideology when it came to immigration debate," the note said.
The suspect's mother works the Pima County Board of Supervisors in Arizona, the briefing added. ...
He's certainly crazy but doesn't that go hand in hand with somebody from the political fringe who is willing to attempt to assinate an elected official? I do agree though that it's too early to say he's a right wing nut job but if more stuff comes out with the anti-immigration group that might change.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
And, honestly, I can't believe that you and JLA, especially, can't see what bsams is doing. God! You're fucking stupid.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
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.
Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
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. 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.
Your argument is blatantly deceitful, M E M.
Are you blind to the fact that the liberal media has been portraying this shooting as caused by "inflammatory political rhetoric" with giant arrows pointed at Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Rep. Michelle Bachman, and even House Speaker Boehner?
Blaming conservatives, despite NO EVIDENCE, NONE, that this Loughner guy in any way was conservative, or ever listened to any of the conservatives accused of "inspiring" his shooting spree.
Your saying...
Quote:
You're confusing me with bsams and WB. They've been picking bits out and ignoring what doesn't fit.
...is a misrepresentative insult to both me and BSAMS. We are citing the facts as they were reported. And citing the editorial wanderings off the deep end into complete fabrication and slander by the liberal media, of conservatives without the slightest shred of evidence.
Did I imagine Krugman's New York Times column? Did I imagine the comments by mainstream Democrats in Washington, such as Sen. Dick Durbin, James Clyburn, Pelosi and Reid, and Democrat-partisan Arizona Sheriff Clarence Dupnik? Their comments are a matter of public record, slandering conservatives without evidence, repeatedly for almost 2 weeks, WELL AFTER the full facts have been made known.
And even more so, the slander of conservative speech, eagerly spread by the liberal media. Again, based on no evidence of Loughner having the slightest influence from conservative speech. Far from it, all who knew Loughner have described him as "liberal".
You're such a fucking liar, M E M. It is you who are being selective in what you choose to source regarding how this story is being reported and spun. Not us.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Last night I watched Anderson Cooper on CNN, where he described Sarah Palin coming forward to make a response to the Loughner shootings, and described her as "attacking Democrats, while portraying herself as a victim".
Completely bypassing the fact that the media has made Palin the focus of blame for the shootings --again: BASED ON NO EVIDENCE-- and that she was just responding to the allegations, and offering her condolences to the victims and their families.
Liberal media bias on full display. Palin was interviewed on Hannity, where she gave her side. It was amazing to see the contrast between what she was alleged, as opposed to what she actually said.
Last night I watched Anderson Cooper on CNN, where he described Sarah Palin coming forward to make a response to the Loughner shootings, and described her as "attacking Democrats, while portraying herself as a victim".
Completely bypassing the fact that the media has made Palin the focus of blame for the shootings --again: BASED ON NO EVIDENCE-- and that she was just responding to the allegations, and offering her condolences to the victims and their families.
Liberla media bias on full display. Palin was interviewed on Hannity, where she gave her side. It was amazing to see the contrast between what she was alleged, as opposed to what she actually said.
Conservative media bias on full display.
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
But Palin went where she could tell her side without being further slandered and misrepresented. Hannity just interviewed the lady. Hannity is arguably generally partisan, yes. But you can't partisanly spin an interview. She said what she said, in a forum where she wouldn't be unfairly slammed. In this case, Palin appearing on Hannity was just giving her equal time.
Which still doesn't counter-balance the thousands of liberal sources that are slandering her, including CNN, as somehow being responsible for Loughner's shootings. Again: WITH ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE.
You arguing that he wasn't a tea party assassin is giving people like mem validation.
More of your
You fit the alienated unemployed unstable dysfunctional anti-social sockfucking profile of a Jared Loughner. Far more than anyone else here could ever even approach.
And since I wasn't around to comment on the whole "toxic rhetoric" thing I'll throw my two cents in.
I think it's ridiculous that anyone is throwing blame around for anything that was said from Palin's targets to Obama's "gun to a knife fight". It's literary devices not just used in political speeches but all literature. It's figurative, not literal. It's never to be taken seriously and never is... unless of course politics is involved and can be used to someones advantage.
To blame someone for that is the same kind of paranoid schizaphrenic conspiracy theory crap that Loughner seemed to suffer from. I swear anymore it's as if everyone in the media suffers mass hysteria. It's like thinking the whole thing was planned by the government to brainwash the masses to carry out some political assassinations or something. Bogus
Ah the one sided ref returns. Doctor I made it pretty clear that I was leaving it open because it was too early on Loughner. On the other hand some folks here are still pushing their partisan talking points.
Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Quote:
Arizona shooting suspect may be linked to anti-Semitic group From: NewsCore January 10, 2011 12:41AM Increase Text Size Decrease Text Size Print Email Share Add to Digg Add to del.icio.us Add to Facebook Add to Kwoff Add to Myspace Add to Newsvine What are these? THE suspect being held over Saturday's shooting of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords may have links to anti-Semitic race hate group American Renaissance.
An internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memo quoted by FOX News Channel revealed the gunman - named by the media as Jared Loughner, 22 - is "possibly linked" to American Renaissance.
The group subscribes to an ideology that is "anti-government, anti-immigration, anti -ZOG (Zionist Occupational Government), anti-Semitic," according to the DHS memo.
Giffords "is the first Jewish female elected to such a high position in the US government. She was also opposite this group's ideology when it came to immigration debate," the note said.
The suspect's mother works the Pima County Board of Supervisors in Arizona, the briefing added. ...
He's certainly crazy but doesn't that go hand in hand with somebody from the political fringe who is willing to attempt to assinate an elected official? I do agree though that it's too early to say he's a right wing nut job but if more stuff comes out with the anti-immigration group that might change.
Yep, I left it open and nothing turned up with the group. If he had been an active member that probably would have changed things as I said. Likewise if he had turned up to be a big Olbermann fan and was stalking Giffords because he was in love with her that would have changed things too. Instead Loughner was a registered indy who didn't even vote. There's things people are stressing while leaving what doesn't fit there agenda out. I could do that too but it just seems dumb at this point.
Bill O'Reilly's opening editorial tonight again perfectly captures the situation, focusing on far-left activist Fuller, who used the most extreme and violent imagery possible in his scorched-earth rhetoric:
Media speculates wildly that it was "extreme" conservative rhetoric that caused Loughner's shooting spree. In the complete absence of supporting evidence.
Media ignores the most extreme liberal rhetoric and death threats, that resulted in Fuller's arrest and psych-evaluation. And despite the most extreme and incriminating liberal rhetoric... the media simply uses selective omission and does not even report it.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Bsams already tried making something of this WB. Somebody who was just shot a couple of times and a military vet probably is a poor choice to go after in this partisan back and forth.
Contrary to what you state, the media did report it.
Bsams already tried making something of this WB. Somebody who was just shot a couple of times and a military vet probably is a poor choice to go after in this partisan back and forth.
That argument might have the slightest validity, if this guy's violence-laden partisan rhetoric didn't begin well before he was shot 2 weeks ago.
Originally Posted By: M E M
Contrary to what you state, the media did report it.
As O'Reilly stated in his interviews tonight, he was only the second source to report the story, and the first on a broadcast news network. Certainly none among the other networks who didn't selectively omit the more extreme rhetoric that incriminates the liberal left with ACTUAL EVIDENCE of liberal-rhetoric inspired violence. (As opposed to the baseless allegations they perpetuated against Sarah Palin and other conservatives every 30 minutes for 2 weeks, based on ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE, NONE.)
If you call that proportionately "reporting it", then your partisanship has clearly blinded you.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Uh no it wasn't reported with the same weight as the Giffords shooting that killed a bunch of people. Why would you even think it should be. I do remember seeing it being reported on ABC with the tea party guy getting some screen time. You can google it and see for yourself that the media did report it.
And, honestly, I can't believe that you and JLA, especially, can't see what bsams is doing. God! You're fucking stupid.
I don't take bsams all that seriously, maybe you shouldn't either.
How am I taking him seriously? You're the one arguing with him.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
Uh no it wasn't reported with the same weight as the Giffords shooting that killed a bunch of people. Why would you even think it should be. I do remember seeing it being reported on ABC with the tea party guy getting some screen time. You can google it and see for yourself that the media did report it.
Uh, no.
It was not given near the level of coverage as allegations that Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, etc., were blamed for the Loughner shootings. That would be at least every 30 minutes alleging conservative rhetoric was to blame --based on no evidence, NONE-- round the clock on every network for 7 days.
And then when liberal commentators are shown to be more inflammatory, Loughner is proven to be more left wing as described by multiple friends, and this other liberal guy starts repeating "you're dead, you're dead" threatening a Tea Party member, and is arrested for his unquestionable violent partisan rhetoric if not outright insanity... somehow that's minimally reported, and inflammatory liberal rhetoric is not held responsible for it.
Fuller's violent rantings and arrest may be reported, but not nearly equally. Quite the contrary, liberal reporters are still blaming Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. Based on absolutely no evidence.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Behind closed doors, California Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez has proposed removing Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords from the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) until she recovers from injuries sustained after being shot in the head on Jan. 8 in Tucson, The Daily Caller has learned.
The proposal sparked an outrage, according to those in the room - including from those in Sanchez's own party.
"It's not appropriate," Texas Democratic Rep. Silvestre Reyes told The Daily Caller, adding that there was outrage among some members in the room when Sanchez made the suggestion. "It's bad for morale during her recovery period."
The Boiling Over of the Liberal Mind is on full display these days, and it is not a pretty sight.
Union protesters in Wisconsin compared Gov. Scott Walker to former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and other tyrants. A sign showed him in a Nazi salute and screamed, "Heil Walker." Another said, "Hitler, Stalin, Walker." Still another showed a swastika next to his name.
New York unions also reached back to World War II, although with a twist. "Wisconsin: Our Pearl Harbor," wrote John Samuelson, president of the local Transport Workers Union, which represents transit workers. He railed against "enemies of labor and democracy."
But Paul Krugman proved himself the master of disaster comparisons. The bid to trim union power reminds the excitable New York Times columnist of the invasion of Iraq.
His argument, as best I can follow it, is that privatizing services and weaning people off government is exactly what Iraq was about, and we did it in Chile 40 years ago, too. Or something. Wherever you look, the bile runneth over. Beyond making fools of themselves with juvenile comparisons, the "social justice" crowd is inadvertently proving that public-sector unions are a privileged class. Touch them and you die from a thousand insults.
Wonder Boy content User rex's personal obsession 7500+ posts Fri Oct 14 2011 02:52 AM Reading a post Forum: Politics and Current Events Thread: Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) Shot At Speaking Event
Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy (re-posting my un-Promodified complete post from page 1 of topic)
Predictably, several at Democratic Underground --and no doubt many other Dems nationwide-- are citing this source, blaming Palin and other conservatives...
...despite that the "targeting" for violence is wildly speculative interpretation. As we all discussed in a topic here months ago, when that story first broke.
And that Bob Beckel (Democrat strategist) already took credit for inventing the "targeting" of politicians to defeat back in the 1980's.
Among many other Democrat campaigns, in more recent years.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
, rex.
Must be wank to violence against Democrats night! 