Congresswoman Shot in Tucson

by leavingwt 442 Replies latest social current

  • journey-on

    The recent and apparent emotional distrust posed against the people who are holding positions in government right now just stoked up

    his mental weakness pushing him to act out on his developed disillusions

    Have you ever stopped to think there might be a legitimate REASON for the distrust? You are either very young (under 25) or very gulllible.

    I guess you think we should all walk around like robots programmed to say "Yes" to everything. People have a right to analyze the issues, listen to all points of view, do their own research, and come to their own conclusions, AND SPEAK OUT. Thank goodness we are still allowed to vote!

    If they see a problem in government and want to speak out about it, and the government turns a deaf ear and "shoots them the bird", I guess we should all just bow our heads in silence and say "Yes, Massa....whatever you say, Massa".

    A lot of the hate and discontent started when the holier-than-thou politicians disrespected and humiliated legitimate dissenters at the Town Hall Meetings over the last two years. They forgot who they work for!!!! Now look at the backlash. The Tea Party was born. You gotta love America!

    Do we not have a right to join voices and make ourselves heard? Sometimes you have to get loud when you're dealing with people that are going to cram it up your a** whether you like it or not.

  • DaCheech

    Burn, you remember a couple of months ago when Union bosses wished worse on the NJ governor?

    where was Obama to put a stop to those threats?

  • BizzyBee

    Here it comes:

    Jewish groups condemn Palin's use of term 'blood libel' Hotlist

    by Barbara Morrill
    Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 10:43:55 AM PST

    Condemnations by Jewish organization, over Sarah Palin's self-serving use of the term "blood libel" to defend herself after the criticism she has received in the wake of the assassination attempt of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, are mounting:

    • Jewish Funds for Justice:

      We are deeply disturbed by Fox News commentator Sarah Palin’s decision to characterize as a “blood libel” the criticism directed at her following the terrorist attack in Tucson. The term “blood libel” is not a synonym for “false accusation.” It refers to a specific falsehood perpetuated by Christians about Jews for centuries, a falsehood that motivated a good deal of anti-Jewish violence and discrimination. Unless someone has been accusing Ms. Palin of killing Christian babies and making matzoh from their blood, her use of the term is totally out-of-line. [...]

      Ms. Palin clearly took some time to reflect before putting out her statement today. Despite that time, her primary conclusion was that she is the victim and Rep. Giffords is the perpetrator. As a powerful rhetorical advocate for personal responsibility, Ms. Palin has failed to live up to her own standards with this statement.

    • National Jewish Democratic Council

      Instead of dialing down the rhetoric at this difficult moment, Sarah Palin chose to accuse others trying to sort out the meaning of this tragedy of somehow engaging in a “blood libel” against her and others. This is of course a particularly heinous term for American Jews, given that the repeated fiction of blood libels are directly responsible for the murder of so many Jews across centuries — and given that blood libels are so directly intertwined with deeply ingrained anti-Semitism around the globe, even today.

    • J Street:

      The country’s attention is rightfully focused on the memorial service for the victims of Saturday’s shooting. Our prayers continue to be with those who are still fighting to recover and the families of the victims. The last thing the country needs now is for the rhetoric in the wake of this tragedy to return to where it was before.

    Meanwhile, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), the only Republican member of Congress who is Jewish, had this to say:

    • ::

    "But I think intellectually, she seems not to be able to understand what's going on here."

    This woman cannot seem to be able to stop digging herself in deeper.

  • james_woods

    Massacre, followed by libel

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Wednesday, January 12, 2011

    The charge: The Tucson massacre is a consequence of the "climate of hate" created by Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Glenn Beck, Obamacare opponents and sundry other liberal betes noires.

    The verdict: Rarely in American political discourse has there been a charge so reckless, so scurrilous and so unsupported by evidence.

    As killers go, Jared Loughner is not reticent. Yet among all his writings, postings, videos and other ravings - and in all the testimony from all the people who knew him - there is not a single reference to any of these supposed accessories to murder.

    Not only is there no evidence that Loughner was impelled to violence by any of those upon whom Paul Krugman, Keith Olbermann, the New York Times, the Tucson sheriff and other rabid partisans are fixated. There is no evidence that he was responding to anything, political or otherwise, outside of his own head.

    A climate of hate? This man lived within his very own private climate. "His thoughts were unrelated to anything in our world," said the teacher of Loughner's philosophy class at Pima Community College. "He was very disconnected from reality," said classmate Lydian Ali. "You know how it is when you talk to someone who's mentally ill and they're just not there?" said neighbor Jason Johnson. "It was like he was in his own world."

    His ravings, said one high school classmate, were interspersed with "unnerving, long stupors of silence" during which he would "stare fixedly at his buddies," reported the Wall Street Journal. His own writings are confused, incoherent, punctuated with private numerology and inscrutable taxonomy. He warns of government brainwashing and thought control through "grammar." He was obsessed with "conscious dreaming," a fairly good synonym for hallucinations.

    This is not political behavior. These are the signs of a clinical thought disorder - ideas disconnected from each other, incoherent, delusional, detached from reality.

    These are all the hallmarks of a paranoid schizophrenic. And a dangerous one. A classmate found him so terrifyingly mentally disturbed that, she e-mailed friends and family, she expected to find his picture on TV after his perpetrating a mass murder. This was no idle speculation: In class "I sit by the door with my purse handy" so that she could get out fast when the shooting began.

    Furthermore, the available evidence dates Loughner's fixation on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords to at least 2007, when he attended a town hall of hers and felt slighted by her response. In 2007, no one had heard of Sarah Palin. Glenn Beck was still toiling on Headline News. There was no Tea Party or health-care reform. The only climate of hate was the pervasive post-Iraq campaign of vilification of George W. Bush, nicely captured by a New Republic editor who had begun an article thus: "I hate President George W. Bush. There, I said it."

    Finally, the charge that the metaphors used by Palin and others were inciting violence is ridiculous. Everyone uses warlike metaphors in describing politics. When Barack Obama said at a 2008 fundraiser in Philadelphia, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun," he was hardly inciting violence.

    Why? Because fighting and warfare are the most routine of political metaphors. And for obvious reasons. Historically speaking, all democratic politics is a sublimation of the ancient route to power - military conquest. That's why the language persists. That's why we say without any self-consciousness such things as "battleground states" or "targeting" opponents. Indeed, the very word for an electoral contest - "campaign" - is an appropriation from warfare.

    When profiles of Obama's first chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, noted that he once sent a dead fish to a pollster who displeased him, a characteristically subtle statement carrying more than a whiff of malice and murder, it was considered a charming example of excessive - and creative - political enthusiasm. When Senate candidate Joe Manchin dispensed with metaphor and simply fired a bullet through the cap-and-trade bill - while intoning, "I'll take dead aim at [it]" - he was hardly assailed with complaints about violations of civil discourse or invitations to murder.

    Did Manchin push Loughner over the top? Did Emanuel's little Mafia imitation create a climate for political violence? The very questions are absurd - unless you're the New York Times and you substitute the name Sarah Palin.

    The origins of Loughner's delusions are clear: mental illness. What are the origins of Krugman's?

    [email protected]

  • journey-on

    Believe me. Sarah understands perfectly. She is well aware that she is the target right now. Keep throwing your darts at her! (Oops...more violent language! Sorry.)

  • BurnTheShips
    As for Sarah, she's the victim................again What a completely undignified person.

    Oh F off, Beks. After three entire news cycles of being called an accessory to mass murder, Palin should now just shut the fuck up about it?

    The failure to pin this on her after such a strenuous effort has been a watershed moment. The great shark jumping of the vapid left elite:

    Normally, a winning faction takes a break. You'd think the Tea Party would be taking a breather after a big win. Well, after this, they are fired up again. The lefties are idiots, they woke up a sleeping giant over the last couple of years, and now they won't let it go back to sleep!

    2008-2010 was your last chance for a loooong time, lefties. The perfect alignment of leftist stars won't happen again in a lifetime (and definitely not until after the aging BBs are comfortably pushing up daisies).


  • purplesofa

    I was not throwing a dart at Palin, I had not heard of the map until the shooting.

    I have simply been wondering what Palin had to say at that time about what Giffords was implying.

    Anyway, I will continue to look elsewhere.

    Have a good day

  • DaCheech
  • BurnTheShips
    Here it comes:

    "Blood libel" is slandering someone by falsely linking them to an event that had bloodshed.

    The leftist media know this was a great speech and can only come up with this pathetic, semantic lie.

    Keep digging, jackasses.

    Meanwhile, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), the only Republican member of Congress who is Jewish, had this to say:
    "But I think intellectually, she seems not to be able to understand what's going on here."

    That was CLYBURN (D), you gullible person:


  • DaCheech

Share this