Arizona shooting

[scobywhru]

you two are both wrong and are just bringing politics into a tragedy, either be men and drop it, or children and keep fighting but please not in here.

[Sk1n]

i don't have to show shit in his random writings

he fucking shot democrats lol

nice try avoiding that small fact but i'm not going to ignore it

He also killed a federal judge who was an appointee of George HW Bush. I'm not avoiding any small fact because it's not any indication of his motives. In fact he had been a long standing attendee of Giffords' events so it points more to a personal matter than a republican versus democrat agenda. Even the Pima County sheriff has said there is no evidence to that assumption. I apologize though because I forgot that you have this amazing sixth sense that helps you read the minds of people you have never met from up to 1000 miles away and can amazingly rationalize their irrational behavior.


It is interesting to note that his classmates have described him as a pot smoking loner who had rambling beliefs about the world and wasn't a fan of religion at all. Maybe we can wildly and randomly speculate on that too?

[Sk1n]

you two are both wrong and are just bringing politics into a tragedy, either be men and drop it, or children and keep fighting but please not in here.

That's exactly what I have been getting at. My first two posts and every post after that have been about how it's a horrible tragedy and to speculate on it just to take political cheap shots is a shitty thing to do.

[joe]

the judge sided with an immigrant against a white person in a recent ruling which led to death threats from right wingers. thanks for proving my point even further

scooby when the crazy dude decided to shoot politicians, HE made it political. also i was just pointing out the obvious - right wing demagogues have been promoting hatred and violence for years so this is the natural result. it's not even a political observation, it's just common sense. skin wanted to turn it into a political argument, which is essentially isn't.

[Sk1n]

the judge sided with an immigrant against a white person in a recent ruling which led to death threats from right wingers. thanks for proving my point even further

scooby when the crazy dude decided to shoot politicians, HE made it political. also i was just pointing out the obvious - right wing demagogues have been promoting hatred and violence for years so this is the natural result. it's not even a political observation, it's just common sense. skin wanted to turn it into a political argument, which is essentially isn't.

I'm saying politics shouldn't be involved in this situation until it's been shown that was his motive. You're the one saying the victim is a democrat so it was a republican and republican motives that are to blame. I never made it into a democrat versus republican thing. I'm saying why not shut the fuck up what the reasons are until an investigation shows what was going on with this sick individual instead of jumping to conclusions.

[joe]

1. shooting a democratic congressperson at their scheduled event sort of proves his motive. he didn't just happen to randomly shoot a democratic politician.

2. i didn't say "it was a republican and republican motives are to blame." i didn't say anything close to that.

3. there weren't any conclusions, jumped-to or otherwise, in what i said. i just stated obvious known facts

[UnbirthdayHatter]

This is terribly sad, and regardless of his motivations he was obviously insane and probably would have killed people for one reason or another eventually.

[Sk1n]

1. shooting a democratic congressperson at their scheduled event sort of proves his motive. he didn't just happen to randomly shoot a democratic politician.

2. i didn't say "it was a republican and republican motives are to blame." i didn't say anything close to that.

3. there weren't any conclusions, jumped-to or otherwise, in what i said. i just stated obvious known facts

1. Right. That's why the authorities and everyone involved in the investigation are saying there is no evidence to his motive. His goal is apparent, but his motivation behind it isn't. You're the one making it out to be a right wing versus left wing situation when nothing has been proven to support that.

2. I never said those were your exact words either, hence why I didn't put them in quotes. Here is what you said:

there are a lot of crazy people out there, combined with right wing noise machine fearmongering, making people believe democrats are attacking them.

Funny how similar that is to what I was paraphrasing.

3. Maybe you should just continuously re-read what you typed because you are stating in your quote I just posted, that it has to do with a right vs left agenda. If that is an obvious known fact of this tragedy, then do show me the evidence to support your claims.

[Mad_Dugan]

[CaptainTripps]

Well it's kind of obvious which party is walking around with guns and t shirts mentioning watering the tree of liberty with that oh so special fertilizer.

Violent rhetoric breeds violence, which is why I never tell my kids that bullshit about sticks and stones, because words can cause much more destruction that a guy with a log and a rock.

Even you have to acknowledge that much Skin, the shit public figures say nowadays is insane.

To me Sarah Palin's "hitlist" is no different than what abortion opponents do with Doctor's info, which has led to murders in the past.

[Sk1n]

Well it's kind of obvious which party is walking around with guns and t shirts mentioning watering the tree of liberty with that oh so special fertilizer.

Violent rhetoric breeds violence, which is why I never tell my kids that bullshit about sticks and stones, because words can cause much more destruction that a guy with a log and a rock.

Even you have to acknowledge that much Skin, the shit public figures say nowadays is insane.

To me Sarah Palin's "hitlist" is no different than what abortion opponents do with Doctor's info, which has lead to murders in the past.

I do acknowledge that words can be harmful and when they are said by certain types of people and received by certain types of people, they can be deadly. I think the shit Sarah Palin says is deplorable and it creates more problems than solutions. The thing is I also feel that both sides are to blame. It goes both ways, like when Obama said at a 2008 fundraiser "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun..." talking about how the campaign could get ugly. In a congressional district here in Southern California, a Democratic incumbent was making racist remarks about her opponent Van Tran and appealing to her Hispanic constituents by saying things like, "The Vietnamese are trying to take over. They are trying to take this seat from us."

Now I will admit that Republicans are more boisterous and outspoken and make bigger asses of themselves, but neither side is completely innocent of it.


And it appears as more information is coming out, he seems to just have a fixation on her for many years, ever since attending her functions in 2007 and apparently felt like he was treated poorly by her. He even had a macabre shrine hidden in a camouflage tent with a skull sitting in a pot with shriveled oranges. Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal about him.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... TopStories

[stickbeast]

[Sk1n]

Ok so you post a video of a very liberal entertainer blaming the right? He makes concessions about Keith Olbermann's rants and says that Obama really didn't mean that gun and knife fight thing and that it was tongue in cheek, but somehow Sarah Palin literally meant that that the 8th District seat in Arizona and other targets should be taken by force? Both sides use tactics to get people riled up because that's what makes people vote. Both sides are to blame when it comes to saying outlandish shit. Olbermann himself called Republican Candidate Scott Brown a "homophobic, racist, reactionary, Tea Bagging supporter of violence against women." But of course it's ok when liberals do that right since that's who you support?

There was even an article in the fucking LA Times, one of the most liberal newspapers out there with the headline, "Loughner's ramblings appear rooted in far right". Then of course in a lot smaller print, "But he also appears to have been influenced by the far left." Then farther down in the article, Mark Pitcavage, director of investigative research at the Anti-Defamation League said his writings were so formless that tying them to any coherent philosophy was impossible and Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center agreed on his website that Loughner was most likely influenced by ideas around him, rather than perpetrating a philosophy of his own.

As for the comment about how Giffords' political opponent had invited supporters to come shoot with her? I'm sure you were also very aware at how Giffords' herself was in favor of less gun control and owned multiple firearms, including a Glock 9 that she would brag about how good of a shot she was.

Using someone that is super left wing and biased possibly isn't the best way to prove a point.

[stickbeast]

Describing someone as a "racist reactionary homophobe" is HARDLY the same as saying your political opponents should be "taken out." You can't compare Olbermann or Maddow as being as crazy/outlandish as Glenn Beck or Bill O'reilly. Often times, Olbermann's insults spew out of Limbaugh, O'Reilly, or Beck acting like idiots. That's even worse than comparing the Black Panthers to the KKK. You should really stop saying that.

Bill Maher makes some really good points.
-If a crazy person like Loughner can pick up a gun, that's a problem.
-If you look at the guys youtube channel, you can see his distrust with big government and the whole gold thing. That does SOUND like Glenn Back.
-Olbermann's Worst Person in the World =/= Putting crosshairs on political opponents, threatening with bodily harm, the ad that had "removing Gifford from office " immediately followed by an invitation to shoot M16s.
-It may be too soon to place DIRECT blame and Loughner may not have been inspired directly by Glenn Beck, but there is definitely some correlation between the republican's recent rhetoric and the events that have taken place.

[shawnolson]

Is it just me... or does Glenn Beck remind you of a cuddly hamster? Big fat cheeks? Hamsterish teeth?

If so, heed my warning. I worked at a pet store many years ago--hamsters are mean, vicious beasts that will rip the flesh off your finger just because you want to stroke its soft fur! I've seen them send blood splattering onto walls with kids running away crying. One thing we learned was just because we had a sign that said "Don't touch the hamsters without an associate", it didn't mean that the people looking at the hamsters could necessarily 1) read or 2) understand the meaning of what they had read.

The moral of the story is that people like cuddly things. And are often unable to use the gray matter in their skull.

PS. A better sign was a stick figure with a really red thumb with a hamster hanging from it... but it turns out that managers don't have much of a sense of humor.

PSS. Ask me sometime about the great mouse masacre of 1998!