by Jack Lee
Inside the hospital Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords-D, shown left, fights for her life after being shot by Jarred Lee Loughner. Outside the hospital our liberal media wasted no time in pointing fingers of blame at prominent Conservatives such as Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck.
I’ve never once heard any of these people advocate violence or even joke about shooting a liberal, however I have heard on more than one occassion popular leftist personalities say Bush should be lynched or shot.
Now the hypocrisy begins. . .again.
Post on Politics writes, “Yes, she (PALIN) should be held responsible!! When people say and do things that has anti government rhetoric towards harm to others. . .”
Maricopa County Supervisor Rose Wilcox-D said, “That’s what we have come to, if you
disagree with someone in Arizona, you demonize them.” She called her state “the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.” She blamed talk radio on her own attempted assassination in 1997 when an angry citizen shot her over her support for new taxes.
Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik-D, criticized the media and politicians for the tone of political rhetoric in Arizona,
“I’d just like to say that when you look at unbalanced people, how they are — 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 is getting to be outrageous,” Dupnik said. “And unfortunately Arizona, I think, has become sort of the capitol.” Dupnik is liberal supporter for open boarders and he is strongly anti-gun. Pima County is often compared to San Francisco or Berkeley when it comes to politic orientations.
Where is the great restraint the media showed in the Ft. Hood shooting? They were practically turning themselves into pretzels trying to avoid the obvious, that this shooter was another Muslim jihadist and he had been heading down this road for some time. Yet, within minutes of the Giffords shooting there is a virtual universal indictment by coast to coast media personalities like Paul Krugman, blaming Palin, Limbaugh and Beck!
The Examiner also had an op-ed piece linking this shooting to so-called hate speech, “Hate Speech is not only harmful at a basic level of degradation, humiliation, isolation, the undermining of a certain social group or at an attempt to devalue someone alone. Hate Speech can also vulcanize marginal groups and radical people within our society who believe that violence is an acceptable recourse for action in order to be heard.”
Apparently the Examiner must have slept right thru the entire Bush administration – they missed a multitude of opportunities to condemn hate speech.
Using an isolated incident to make a political point is nothing new in politics or the news media. The media has been slouching towards a Joseph Goebbels style of journalism for a long time. Heir Goebbels wrote, “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.” If you substitute the word [state] for [mainstream media] there’s a problem for concerned, not the actions of one crazy person.
If the media was really concerned about truth and the mindset of the Tucson shooter, Jarred Lee Loughner, they would be in consult with the psychiatry department not the poly-sci department.
By allowing the truth to be heard and facts to define the issues vs opinions presented in the 30 second first on the scene sound bites from any media agency we allow ourselves to be duped every time. I have made a conscience effort not to form opinions until all the ‘crafted news’ from the ‘first to report’ rating grabbers has passed. What is happening with us in America that we need to hear opinions right now verse letting let the the facts speak for themselves.
It is in this degree of haste most people of the politicos type will use spin to advance their ideology mantra first at the expense of truth. And if called for it being reported incorrectly by actual honest reporting they always fall back on ‘well thats how it was being reported at the time’ type of excuse.
“Outside the hospital our liberal media wasted no time in pointing fingers of blame at prominent Conservatives such as Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck.
However, I’ve never once heard any of these people advocate violence or even joke about shooting a liberal. ”
Beck stirred up a lot of controversy when he joked about poisoning Nancy Pelosi. I’m surprised you haven’t heard of this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UudQuVOwSds
Once again I want to stress that I don’t think this had ANYTHING to do with the Arizona shooter, and I agree with the general point of this article, which is that this was a lone nut whose political views were too incomprehensible to label as right or left-wing. Those who rushed to judgment without the facts should be ashamed of themselves. (Including those on the right who are calling this kid a left-wing radical. I’m glad to see Post Scripts hasn’t joined in with that baloney.)
That said, this kind of rhetoric should still be considered unacceptable by American audiences. And I do think it’s incited violence before, such as the case of Byron Williams, who went after the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, two of Beck’s favorite targets, and who claimed to be heavily inspired by Glenn Beck.
The shooting of Giffords, and the deaths of all the other victims cannot be traced back to Beck, Palin, the Tea Party, or any political person or movement, and everyone needs to realize that. However, it has at least gotten us talking about changing the tone of our political discourse in this country, and that’s something we should be talking about.
Today, the Hater-In-Chief, Rush, said that in any large group of people, you will always have a few nutcases. For years he has been telling us that words have consequences. He will tell us that Jeremiah Wright MUST have had an effect on Obama’s thinking. He speaks words to have an effect on public discourse, yet today he says that the hate he spews has no effect.
Bull****!
And to your response that it can’t be proven, I will use some of Rush’s own neoconned logic: You can’t prove it didn’t happen because of what the haters said.
Trying to excuse what Sarah or Rush has done–and are still doing–does not solve the problem.
Sarah, by placing targets over Giffords’ district did indeed call for Giffords to be targeted. Her pathetic excuses, “Oh no! Those are surveyor’s map markings (wink, wink U betcha)!” are bull**** and no one with an IQ above room temperature is buying that nonsense.
Unfortunately, it appears the shooter has the IQ of a TEAbagger. He may believe you.
The haters will tell us it is up to the moderate Muslims to call upon the more extreme Muslims to tone down the hatred.
Let’s turn that around. Are you a moderate? Or are you an extremist, Jack?
Will you call upon Sarah, Rush, and all the other haters to tone it down?
Will you call upon them to at least tell the frickin’ TRUTH?
That’s the solution to hate–truth.
And Jack?
If you’re not part of the solution . . .
Quentin, now you’re being just plain silly. Sarah Palin wasn’t even the first to use targets. This was a practice done long before Palin came on scene. How come you didn’t know that Democrats, in their 2004 election used bulls eye targets on states where Bush won by single digits. They refer to their operatives in the “targeted” states as, working behind military lines. No such militancy was seen in the Palin camp. If I can find such information – why can’t you Quentin? I think I know why, because it does not fit your agenda and so you side step the inconvenient truth. You have let your bias limit your pursuit of the whole story.
That’s your right, I suppose to hate and wish to vilify the Republican Party or the Tea Party, even if you arrive there by bogus reasons. But, may I remind you that you do so at your own peril, because we will come right back at you with the facts.
I’ll agree with you on one thing here, words are meant to have an impact – words are also meant to have consequences. I wouldn’t have it any other way, would you? Otherwise whats the point of saying anything? Saying something I or others disagree with does not equal hate speech. Hate speech is often bigoted and it is seen as something vile and repugnant to the average man. Politics can get a little rough and tumble at times and I can cite you many instances where democrats engaged in some very low blows that could be arguably hate speech – how come that stuff didn’t jerk your chain?
Remember when a satirical rant had Alec Baldwin screaming national television that we should march on Washington and kill Congressmen and their families! A democrat ad once had J.D. Hayworth in the cross hairs. The media poo-poo’d it just as they always do as harmless and maybe it was, but it was still in incredible poor taste and I’ve never heard Hannity, Limbaugh, Palin, etc., say or do anything remotely re close to that sort of thing.
Quentin, heres another example and Ill try to keep them to a minimum, but the invocation speaker for the democrats called then Connecticut Governor John G. Rowland, the Prince of Darkness and a snake and wanted him dead!!! This is the speaker a democrat convention! He said and I quote, “Death to the prince of darkness!” and then later he said, “In fact, I know things about him that I don’t choose to bring out in public today, that I have observed with my own eyes. He is a snake!” I could write a book about the slurs democrats openly use because its one of their favorite tactics to hit below the belt. Yet, youre silent on such attacks? Give me a break! Quentin you’re not being fair or balanced, but do you have a right to speak your opinion regardless.
I would have to comment that in one post Mr Q has set a all time high score in the use of hate names/themes in any post I have read yet.
The Hater-In-Chief, Rush ‘title’ verse (not said but implied ‘MR’)Jeremiah Wright.
Trying to excuse what Sarah or Rush has done–and are still doing–does not solve the problem.
it appears the shooter has the IQ of a TEAbagger.(Being i agree with the tea bag concern for America’s poor direction, I guess that makes me a concern as well)
Will you call upon Sarah, Rush, and all the other haters.
Let’s turn that around. Are you a moderate? Or are you an extremist. If you’re not part of the solution …..
Q If these are truly your thoughts toward these people, there seems to be a dark side to your comments that support all the problems you memorialized as well as use in your above post. Possible a personal time out is needed to consider your own hate oriented words
Thinking out loud, but do you suppose if this had been a conservative congressman at least half the crowd would have been well armed and the gunman wouldn’t have got off more than a few shots before he was cut down?
This is a copy and Paste. So please don’t sue me ! 🙂
Shootings bring out worst of Web rumor mill
Posted: Monday, January 10 2011 at 03:16 pm CT by Bob Sullivan
In normal times, the Internet is a vicious rumor mill. Just today, a tall-tale that Facebook.com was shutting down in March successfully made the rounds.
But after a national tragedy like this weekend’s shooting in Tucson, it can feel like pursuit of simple facts has been overrun by a something like a computer virus that spreads exaggerations, lies and distortions. Even as the national media was trying to determine if Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was alive or dead, politically motivated misinformation that suited nearly every agenda imaginable began spreading fast and furious.
There were claims that Sarah Palin had deleted her controversial “Don’t Retreat — Instead RELOAD!” Tweet from last March. She hadn’t. An apparent fake Facebook page attributed to alleged shooter Jared Lee Loughner emerged, claiming President Barack Obama was one of his heroes. Another profile identified him as a Tea Party member — but it misspelled his name. There were also images of a voter registration record claiming his was a Republican; but the record misspelled Tucson.
In hindsight, misspellings or other obvious errors should make Internet users quickly discount these information sources as false. But as anyone who runs a quick Twitter search can quickly see, there’s a new Internet rumor fool born every seemingly every nanosecond. And during times of crisis, debunking sites like Snopes.com or FactCheck.org — which act a bit like truth anti-virus products– can’t possibly keep up with the exponential virus-like spread of rumors. People often mindlessly pass on e-mails or Tweets that fit their political world-view or the reality they root for.
“The Internet is clearly a much more dangerous avenue for spreading rumors and deceptive information,” said Brooks Jackson, spokesman for FactCheck.org. “Like-minded people pass them on because it sounds right to them…It vastly improves on old whispering campaigns.”
In the past, political operatives often whispered to others about a candidate’s drinking problem or an affair, but that rumor had to spread in a linear fashion, from one person to another person. Also, the rumor would degrade because of the “telephone effect,” as it was continually altered each time it was passed along. But on the Web, rumors are spread with “100 percent fidelity,” Jackson said, which lends a lot to their credibility.
And of course, the virus metaphor holds neatly when you think about how quickly inaccurate information can spread exponentially online.
Also, many readers consider the sender, rather than the source, when they encounter rumors. A Tweet sent by a trusted co-worker might bring with it an overly generous air of credibility, and the reader might not carefully assess the original source of the information.
“You’re crazy Uncle Harry is going to forward you all sorts of things,” Jackson said. “You might believe the person who sent it to you because you know them, but often, the ultimate source is not identified.”
Jackson, whose site is devoted to carefully debunking false political statements with careful, time-consuming research, has advice for readers who might encounter rumors about the Arizona shooting in the coming days.
“If the ultimate source is not identified, you can delete these things without reading them, and you will be better informed than if you open them,” he said. “In our experience, well more than 90 percent of them turn out to be false or so completely distorted that they leave a false impression.”
Q: “He will tell us that Jeremiah Wright MUST have had an effect on Obama’s thinking.”
Not quite what I’ve heard. I’ve heard people on the right say that it’s hard to believe someone would spend twenty years in attendance at a church where the pastor made comments like this if they didn’t share at least some of those beliefs. Oprah left this church. Was it because she couldn’t abide the inflamatory nature of Wrights preaching? I don’t know, but I do know I would have left the first time I heard such language from any pastor of mine.
One thing I’ve learned about you Quentin is that you are not a very careful listener/reader. The second is that although you claim to be outside or above all the vitriol and partisan politics you have never on this blog made a negative comment about those like Kos, Gerafalo, Mathews, President Obama, or any other politician whose comments from the left are as widely heard as Rush and as inflamatory as you claim his speech is. Your obsession places your comments in question.
Putting your personal attacks on me aside, I still can’t figure what your deal is. I know you are smart enough to engage in a more substantive manner with those who post here so I have to wonder if you think yourself some kind of mischeivous puppeteer!
Chris you are one of the few people on the left that has the kind of integrity and personal restraint that would be required to make political discourse in America less vitriolic and hateful. I don’t think it will happen any time soon, however since there are so few like you.
The fervent pleas to tone it down from the left have always proven to be just so much talk, more of the political gaming that the left has always used in and out of crisis situations. How do I know? They do not practivce what they preach and they do not take the same stance when their own make hateful, erroneous, ugly remarks. In fact they rejoice, they talk of their players as having superior intelligence and craftiness…they speak of political accumen.
The conservative, gentlemanly, good sport values that once were the norm for most people in both parties, with a few pointed exceptions in the heat of political campaigns, is a thing of the past. It lasted for awhile longer in the conservative camp but conservatives have realized that to play the game of politics with that handicap hung around your neck is no way to win elections or the hearts and minds of the people. Roald Reagan managed it but he was the last successful person to maintain dignity and authority.
Unless there is a dramatic shift in the tactics of left hate ranters and politicos, this game will continue to be very rough. The left will continue to ignore its own terrible record and demonstrations of hate and people like Quentin will continue to pretend to be above it all when in fact they are as hateful as they come…and things will not change.
The man now serving as our president in the White House is a former community organizer. His purpose was to stir people up and get them angry at the opposition party. That is at the heart of the Saul Alinsky method for activism that he and many on the left adopted going back to the sixties. The language they use is used not to make a point or to contrast one idea against another, or to parody the failings and follies of the opposition with humor, and certainly not to educate, but to incite. When Obama tells his constituents he wants them to “argue with them and get in their face” he is directly asking them to be intimidating and possibly threatening. When he makes remarks like, “if they bring a knife, we’ll bring a gun” he is using the language of a street thug preparing to do battle.
If you look at the approach that members of SEIU (or the two men from the New Black Panther Party) took when confronting their opponents the charge that the right is “stirring up hate” by talking on the radio or TV becomes a bit hypocritical if not laughable. The SEIU were often bussed in specifically to be confrontational. Hate and intimidation is no stranger to the left.
I agree that our speech has become negative and quite graphic. There is little left to say or do that has not been said or done. This spewing of whatever comes into ones head, can be traced back to those who participated in the massive anti-establishment tirade that began in the sixties and that anti-establsihment mindset continues to this day. Near zero respect for institutions and authority, foul language, outrageousness and shock became the tools they would use to effect progressive change.
How do you counter people like that? I can tell you from experience that taking the high road and maintaining dignity in the face of nasty lies and distortions does great harm.
I just viewed the clip of Glenn beck that you posted in your comment above. I don’t follow Glenn so I don’t know what he was up to or trying to convey. The clip doesn’t offer any clues. it is, however, fairly obvious that he was not seriously proposing that he would do such a thing.
Contrast that attempt at comedy, with words taken back before the sentence was completed, with the very serious comments made by our own President when talking to his constituents prior to an election. He referred to the opposition as the enemy. Usually an enemy is someone you seriosly need to kill or eliminate. That is pretty darned inflamatory and was not at all said in jest. No one objected or thougt anything about it.
Oh gosh…time to go home! Will continue later.
Here’s the thing, Mr. Ey.
The instant I heard of the shootings, I suspected a TEA bagger. Who else has so much hate? This was definitely an act of hate.
1+1 = 2 This isn’t rocket science.
What amazes me is that it took the so-called librul media took any longer than mere seconds to make the conclusion. 92% of Americans counties have ONLY hate on their local radio stations. Hate that is passing for news.
I hate too. I hate liars on the radio who cause little girls to be shot.
And I haven’t heard different!
Do you have trouble distinguishing between adjectives and insults?
Calling Rush a liar is a true statement. Rush saying that Democrats want to see “America destroyed” is a hateful, inciteful statement.
Asking moderate Republicans to put the brakes on the extremist elements in your party means there is a dark side to my comments?
By that logic, your side is full of dark elements. But, that was my point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why don’t you ask them to shut the Hell up! before more people get killed???!!!
BTW Jack, ask a 7th grade teacher if “They did it too!” is a valid excuse. Please also show us the link to the democratic “targets.”
WE DO know if Loughner had shown up at a Bush rally wearing the wrong T-shirt he would have been arrested and there would have been no shooting!
I believe you did suspect a tea bagger, as you indicated you ‘reacted’ but did not think it through, just like most of what you have written lacks anything of thorough thought or substance. Tea baggers are just what they profess and are trying to achieve, a new and better direction for America, using the Constitution as a road map for recovery, and they want it from BOTH parties. How unfortunate for you that you can not see this and just spew unfounded blather.
As to my understanding of English, Be particularly cautious in your own use of adjectives that don’t have much to say in the first place, and in your case you have overworked them into an insult. You Q have become a point of concern through your agenda of spin and demarcation of others writers words and their opinions. Simply, you sir are the user of nomenclature that one would expect of a hater. I hope that by my using both an adjective with an insult in the same sentence (which you are free to diagram) you might reflect on ALL your comments of late, starting with the one thrown toward Wally Herger. I believe that Jack and Tina have shown you more tolerance than you deserve, as you have become most offensive, but that is their call not mine. As to the rest of your reply, Ill pass on any comments, I stand by my thinking and thats what provides me with a balanced opinion, unlike most of your comments. Good evening to you sir!
Did I lie–as Rush and Sarah do–when I gave my opinion?
Did I pass my opinion off as “news?”
Do I have an audience of millions?
Did I get on the radio today and acknowledge there are dangerous nutjobs who listen to me?
And then continue to spew half truths sure to inflame them?
I won’t lie to you, sir.
I hate hate.
So?
Quentin here’s where we can agree I hope: I believe voters are tired of mud slinging in elections. They say so every election season. Unfortunately, voters also buy into mud slinging. And because it works, especially in close races – we get more of it and it happens on both sides. This is a dangerous cycle, that gets worse every year. We can’t keep upping the rhetoric without somebody or somebodies getting totally fed-up and then they go off and do something totally irrational out of their frustration and anger.
However, I think the left is far more likley to be the aggressors when there is damage or violence done due to politics. For instance one night I was closing up the GOP Headquarters in the downtown area and I was alone. Then some drunks spilled out the front door of Duffy’s Tavern across the street. They started mocking me for being a Republican. The names they yelled at me are not fit for print. They made a false run at me like they were going to rush across the street and beat me up. They got about as far as the middle of the road and stopped and laughed. They seemed very pleased with themselves and they boasted how they had “scared” me as they walked off. This was a group of 7-8 30ish types, long haired men and some trashy looking women. I’ve seen them around, and they’re definately the far left types.
A few days earlier at our same place we had been the target of taggers and some vandalism on both the front doors and back door. It was threatening language. On yet another occassion some hippy looking broad tossed a paper bag of dog poop at us while we sat peacefully inside.
In and outside of law enforcement I’ve had several clashes with mobs full of liberal activists. Needless to say, I consider them the problem here, not the standup for America types of older men and women who have become sick and tired of the filthy slime that burn our flags, insult’s our country and threatens it’s leaders. Of course, when that happens it’s because the republicans are in control. We don’t see much of that now because Obama is in there, but if was a republican president now you can bet they would be out in the streets protesting Afghanistan or something! There’s your haters and hate speech – this is part of the communist cold war play book too. Obviously it’s a dead cause, but they don’t know it yet and the tactics continue.
I can’t even begin to imagine a group of Republicans behaving the outrageous way those on the rabid left behave. Our reps are far too mature and I believe can hold the liquor better too. lol then again we are the adults and they are the children.
Next time you accuse of Sarah or Rush of lying, how about some specific examples?
Quick question for Mr. Ey:
Which upsets you more.
My comments about Wally?
Or, Wally’s comments about that “Great American” terrorist?
Quick example of Rush and Sarah’s lies?
They will tell you Ronald Reagan was a conservative.
The truth is a little different.
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/8099273
Q: “92% of Americans counties have ONLY hate on their local radio stations. Hate that is passing for news.”
This is a lie, and absurd on two counts:
A. 99% of the content on talk radio (that has a following) is opinion and observation…not news. It is discussion about things in the news and politics in general.
B. Your own thought, that it is “hate” filled, is just another opinion. (And a rather hateful one)
“I hate liars on the radio who cause little girls to be shot.”
Another opinion; hateful as well as eroneous.
“Rush saying that Democrats want to see “America destroyed” is a hateful, inciteful statement.”
Thank you for sharing your opinion about Rush’s opinion. The millions of people who listen to Rush each day get what he is saying even if you don’t. They can see the destruction that is happening due to this man’s policies and from their point of view, whether by design or ignorance, the result of his policies do beg questions like, does he realize what he’s doing? Is it on purpose? These are valid questions. The point of discussing this is also valid since it concerns our futures and our children’s futures…and quite possibly the continuation of America as we have known it.
“Please also show us the link to the democratic ‘targets.'”
Here’s the KOS site as it is today. He scrubbed it but it still shows Gifford’s highlighted name as a “targeted” Blue Dog
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/748852/511/541568
See the KOS page captured in it’s original form here:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/01/08/paul-krugman-blames-giffords-shooting-palin-limbaugh-and-beck
See also HillBuzz:
http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/08/my-congresswoman-voted-against-nancy-pelosi-and-is-now-dead-to-me-eerie-daily-kos-hit-piece-on-gabrielle-giffords-just-two-days-before-assassination-attempt-on-her/
“Did I get on the radio today and acknowledge there are dangerous nutjobs who listen to me?”
I have no doubt that anumber of nutjobs have read your comments here. One threatedned me and Jack had to put him in his place. Any thoughts on the people that may die because you have used the words hate and bagger and because you have little of value to say but plenty of outrage to express?
“I won’t lie to you, sir.
I hate hate.”
It takes a real hater to hate with such dedication and intensity. You really should attempt to get to the bottom of it because it likely began long before the Rush man was ever on the radio. He’s definitely not your number one experience…try before the age of five.
Words do mean things, Quentin, but they don’t force people to commit murder…only a twisted mind in a broken, lost soul can do that.
Jack: “I can’t even begin to imagine a group of Republicans behaving the outrageous way those on the rabid left behave.”
When the rabid left behave this way conservative people watch and shake our heads. Media cover these events as if they were important parts of our political discourse…we never hear about that speech has become too harsh and should be toned down…we never hear that those people are engaging in hate speech. In fact some of those commentators engage in hate speech themselves with impunity.
This entire effort to make the right responsible for murderous acts in America is just part of the template as you have said.
They will use any event and make any outrageous accusation to paint the right in a poor light. AND OBVIOUSLY IT HAS WORKED FOR MANY PEOPLE…BUT IT IS THE BIGGEST LIE OF ALL.
The trouble is their attempts to counter the right have failed miserably, left talk radio had big funding and big names (and was filed with ugly, foul mouthed talk) but couldn’t make it. They began with what they thought was the Rush template and ended up being truly hate radio. It’s what happens when you begin with a lie. Most people won’t listen to hate radio.
In many ways they are losing the argument, if not all of the elections, and they really hate it…can’t stand it! Like petulant children…they resort to fits and THROWING STONES. You would think that at some point along the way they would get curious…ah well.
Q: “They will tell you Ronald Reagan was a conservative.
The truth is a little different.”
The “facts” when selected carefully and then isolated in a conversation of your choosing CAN tell a different story but that doesn’t make it the truth, it is just another story. There are a lot of Reagan stories and many of them tied together in similar fashion would show he was a conservative. You haven’t done anything here that isn’t done on talk radio by /rush every day. The difference is he talks about pursuing the truth…you on the other hand think you, ond only you, know the truth.
What is your point? That Reagan was a failure because he had human failings, or changed his opinion, or wasn’t always able to achieve, as a cog in our checks and balances system, all that he would like to have achieved?
You are a hard task master, Q, and an incredibly naive or ridiculous person if you really expect such perfection in any person much less those who are elected to office.
When you start criiticizing Democrats, particularly those who lean Marxist, and holding them to account for the mess we’re in I might take these pot shots at Reagan with a greater sense of fair play and genuineness on your part. As it is you just seem to be a person who enjoys “targeting” Reagan, and the people who appreciate him, for ridicule. What is the point?
Reagan was certainly good at articulating conservative values and he certainly inspired and moved more people on this earth, in a very positive way, toward more conservative values than either you or I will ever do.
The truth is that the shooter was not a TEA partier, he was a nutjob. But there are haters like Q willing to assign blame to people they disagree with. Ironic that you assume those you hate and disagree with must then be the haters, but then lefties are always twisted that way.
The shooter was not just crazy, he was obviously EVIL, another word lefties hate to hear because they think everything is gray. There are a lot of evil people in this world, and what is miraculous is that it’s still fairly safe to serve in Congress. More celebrities receive threats and attempts on their life than those who serve in office.
But to take such a tragic act of violence and try to twist it, to use it for political gain without any hesitation, without any thought of sympathy for the victims, that seems to be an act spurred by a lot of hatred too. OK, so Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin say that we are overtaxed and that democrats push government a little too far onto our personal freedoms. I guess that makes them horrific liars and responsible for any violence that happens? Oh sure, you betcha.
Trying to excuse what Sarah or Rush has done–and are still doing–does not solve the problem.
Sarah, by placing targets over Giffords’ district did indeed call for Giffords to be targeted.
Quentin, placing targets over districts during campaigning is not unusual, democrats put Bulls eye over republican districts that they were after.
Laughner, according to people who know him say he is a left wing pot head. No matter what he would have gone after the congresswoman, he was angry with her.
The Tea Party are not tea baggers by the way. They started due to the Health Care issue and it grew, what hate do they spew as a group, im not talking about isolated incidents.
What specifically has Palin said that was hate?
You said Rush lied about calling Reagan a conservative? OMG is that the best you can do, hell Quentin John Kennedy was a conservative by comparison of hte left wing we have in power now.
I do not want to be the guy who saw it coming and didn’t say something so how do I report Quentin Colgan as a future clock tower sniper?
^5 Steve!
I will preference my reply with this observation, Q, you have mastered the art of discussion diversion, an often used tactic I see practiced by Liberal Politicians all the time in interviews and debates when confronted by facts that challenge their ideology. The subject was not about Wally it was about your hyporcrical manner when you suggested Wally be a target. You sir were the obvious hater with a direct remark. I only mentioned Wally as a reminder of that comment, and to point out you do not follow the path you acknowledge. I do not recall one comment about a political figure as a potential target in any posting other than yours on this forum; you and only you have appeared to be the inciter. Most of what I read here from others is either posted snippets for accuracy or opinions reasoned out, you have been less than entertaining in your convoluted postings and I will apply the label of Encyclopedia of misinformation to most of your postings. Q. you have the right to voice your opinions, but you do not have the right to yell FIRE In a theater.
Here’s some good news:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1346131/Majority-Americans-believe-political-vitriol-responsible-Arizona-massacre.html
And just in time too since the majority of stories to be found on the web are like the following:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/tobin/386122
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/03/01/100301fa_fact_macfarquhar?currentPage=all%20of%20the%20economist/columnist
Can the liberal activist tiger change its stripes?
The game has been found out. It will be harder and harder for them to play it from now on. The left is being pressed to change their ways. A new goal would be honest exchanges and competition in the arena of ideas. Are they capable of playing honestly and graciously?
Other than Chris we really haven’t seen liberals being gracious have we? : )