jrrtoken Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Source The Tea Party promised to take America back from the clutches of commie Muslims, and they're doing it one step at a time; frontier justice-style baby. A US congresswoman was shot in the head at point blank range today at a public meeting outside a grocery shop in Arizona. The attacker was a gunman who hit up to a dozen other people at the constituency event before being restrained. Gabrielle Giffords, a 40-year-old Democratic member of the House of Representatives, was taken to hospital where she was last night undergoing surgery. ~~~~ Giffords's Tuscon constituency office was vandalised last March after she voted in favour of Barack Obama's controversial health bill, which has been bitterly opposed by the American right. Giffords had been named as a political campaign target for conservatives in November's elections by former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin for her strong support of Obama's reforms. Palin had published a "target map" on her website using images of gun sights to identify 20 House Democrats, including Giffords, for backing the new health care law. At an event in 2009 which was similar to the one Giffords was holding today, a protester was removed by police when his pistol fell to the supermarket floor. You ain't going to find that ad on Palin's website now, as she's probably avoiding any implication of motivating/condoning a political assassination and/or terrorist attack. But just in case: I'll leave you to draw the conclusions, friend-o. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N-5/Prudii Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Add Palin to the list, and i'll be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qui-Gon Glenn Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Pastramix: Thank you so much for preserving that.... this kinda stuff just "vaporizes" too often. A smoking gun is a smoking gun, or at least a gun sight. @N5/Prudii - yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Can we go all Waco on the Teapartiers now, I'm getting really sick of this ****? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Hunger Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Can we go all Waco on the Teabaggers now, I'm getting really sick of this ****? No offense, but that sort of mentality is why that congresswoman got shot in the first place. Those "Teabaggers" are you fellow Americans. We are all Americans, America has no place for divided identity, and the sooner we all realize this the sooner our world will be a better place. For the sake of our country, let's all be "the better man". Or should we just all point fingers and scream about whether someone has a "D" or an "R" after their name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urluckyday Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I'm going to withhold judgment on this issue until there's more information about it...I'm not into conspiracy theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommycat Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Yes, just like the taxicab stabber was one of the tea party. Seems that every time one of the left's people gets attacked, they scream, "There's another Tea[partier] doing bad things" Then a few days later we find that the attacker was actually one of the leftists. Yet there has never been an apology from those leftists here who accused the right of being violent monsters. So far none of the violence that has been blamed on the Tea Party has actually been done by tea party members. Oh and maybe, JUST MAYBE, before you go and accuse the righties, you might do a bit of research. Jared Lee Loughner was at best, a nutjob. He talked of mind control and was pretty well rambling in his youtube videos. Oh and in case you bring up that he was against the takeover by the government, he also happens to like the US flag burning vid. Not exactly typical of the over the top nationalist right wingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Kay I was going to stop posting here just because tensions arise. But to this I just have to say something. As a libertarian I have never been particularly a fan of Palin despite my rightward lean. Personally I abhor that she shoots wolves. Having had a 69-72% wolf hybrid myself, I can tell you it is not like having a dog. So she's on my ****-list for that. Still this appears, at best, to be indirect influence. Until we have evidence of direct influence, the most that can be done to Palin is to shake a finger at her. The shooter ought to be made to bear the full brunt of his responsibility for his own actions. Period. I can foresee several issues coming up as a consequence of this: -Reinforces the negative stereotype/image of our military. If you have had personal bad experience with military, then that's one thing and a little irrationality is allowed. (I may still press you on it, though.) -This will get the anti-gun "We'll 'fix' the 2nd amendment" crowd in a frenzy again to ban guns or at least put more restrictive laws on them as well as a statist supervisory monitoring program by the government. You could get rid of all nukes and guns and some idiot/s would later accidentally re/discover how to make them (all over again). -Censorship issues may come up. You may be (insert political lean/affiliation) wanting to shut up your opposite, but remember it'll eventually backfire because censorship cuts both directions. It is sad that things had to come to this, today. Offering my condolences: My thoughts and prayers are with Gabrielle Giffords, the congresswoman. I hope yours are as well regardless your personal beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 No offense, but that sort of mentality is why that congresswoman got shot in the first place. Those "Teabaggers" are you fellow Americans. We are all Americans, America has no place for divided identity, and the sooner we all realize this the sooner our world will be a better place. For the sake of our country, let's all be "the better man". Or should we just all point fingers and scream about whether someone has a "D" or an "R" after their name? No it's not. We're talking about a bunch of reckless celebrity *******s (Beck, Palin, O'Reilly) who have spent the last 2 years whipping crazy people into a frenzy, and then acting like they have no responsibility when one of those people goes nuts. O'Reilly spent years calling George Tiller a murderer (No he wasn't) and then gets all quiet when some nutjob kills him. What this kind of **** has lead to is pretty similar to all the militia bull**** that went on back in the 90's, the problem now is everyone has the internet, and 24 hour propaganda broadcasts masquerading as news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 No it's not. We're talking about a bunch of reckless celebrity *******s (Beck, Palin, O'Reilly) who have spent the last 2 years whipping crazy people into a frenzy, and then acting like they have no responsibility when one of those people goes nuts. O'Reilly spent years calling George Tiller a murderer (No he wasn't) and then gets all quiet when some nutjob kills him. What this kind of **** has lead to is pretty similar to all the militia bull**** that went on back in the 90's, the problem now is everyone has the internet, and 24 hour propaganda broadcasts masquerading as news. Ok, so if/when Sarah Palin ever eats a bullet, we should all hunt down the rabid Palin/Tea party haters at LF, Huffpo, MSNBC, etc... b/c of all the **** they've been posting? Makes as much sense as what you're advocating..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Before we start jumping to conclusions... Caiti Parker, who knew the suspect in high school four years ago, described him as a loner and political radical who was left-wing or liberal at the time and obsessed with the 2012 phenomenon. Source And, though six others died in the attack, Giffords' surgery was a success and her surgeon expects her to recover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I got that vibe when the media was obsessing about the subject yesterday and got to discussing the perp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 No it's not. We're talking about a bunch of reckless celebrity *******s (Beck, Palin, O'Reilly) who have spent the last 2 years whipping crazy people into a frenzy, and then acting like they have no responsibility when one of those people goes nuts. O'Reilly spent years calling George Tiller a murderer (No he wasn't) and then gets all quiet when some nutjob kills him. What this kind of **** has lead to is pretty similar to all the militia bull**** that went on back in the 90's, the problem now is everyone has the internet, and 24 hour propaganda broadcasts masquerading as news. Post reminds me of the situation in Pakistan right now - a mass radicalisation of the youth via the mass media, passing right through the corrupt and ineffective government. Resulted in the governor of the Punjab province of the country being killed by one of his security guards, over a blasphemy law that he opposed. Since Taseer's death, rather than being condemned, was celebrated by radicalised people across the country, it's pretty safe to say that Pakistan's heading down an anti-liberal, ultra-religious fundie path that may end up having serious consequences 20-30 years down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommycat Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Evil-Q: No fair hitting the Tea Party haters here with the truth. Only the Tea Party and Right wingers are willing to shoot people they oppose. So this guy was a Liberal So he was Left Wing. He still must have had ties to the Tea party... somehow. He also killed a judge that was appointed by George HW Bush. This guy was anti-government. Giffords represented a part of that government to him. It could have been any congressperson and he would have shot them. He just happened to live in Tucson. Which just happened to be Congressional District 8. Which just happened to be Giffords District. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urluckyday Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 What's up with the title of this thread? She's not dead...she was actually communicating with the hospital staff today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pho3nix Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Because he made the thread when she was still in critical condition and assumed she would die Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urluckyday Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 He probably should fix that then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 No fair hitting the Tea Party haters here with the truth. Only the Tea Party and Right wingers are willing to shoot people they oppose. No, but it is completely fair to compare liberals to unpatriotic flag burners. News for you I love my country just as much as anyone and while I hate to see the flag disrespected. I will fully defend someone’s right to burn it because of a little thing called the Constitution. Until everyone figures out 1 + 2 does not equal 7 these debates are useless. Just because someone supports certain positions on the left or the right does not make someone a Republican or a Democrat. I should know, I once voted for Reagan and then again Bush, does that make me a Republican? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 What's up with the title of this thread? She's not dead...she was actually communicating with the hospital staff today.For the first hours of reporting the shooting most news agencies labeled her as dead, which although was s***** reporting at the time, I guess they were somewhat correct in treating a headshot as a fatality. 90% of the time, a slug in the head means a kick of the bucket (Except in Fallout). So this guy was a Liberal So he was Left Wing. He still must have had ties to the Tea party... somehow. He also killed a judge that was appointed by George HW Bush. I fail to see your link between "anti-government" and "liberal". Any ideology could be anti-government, and by the suspect's proclivities concerning reading material, he wouldn't really fit any spectrum role nicely. Do I think that he was influenced by the anti-government rhetoric being produced by the Tea Party, such as the Palin hit-list? Definitely. Does that make the shooter a bona-fide supporter of the Tea Party movement? Not exactly, but I'd certainly say that the movement should be responsible for its own rhetoric, including all of its complications, no matter how distant. This guy was anti-government. Giffords represented a part of that government to him. It could have been any congressperson and he would have shot them. He just happened to live in Tucson. Which just happened to be Congressional District 8. Which just happened to be Giffords District.Funny; your previous list seems to imply some agenda-driven plot, rather than "just some anarchist-type". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I fail to see your link between "anti-government" and "liberal". Any ideology could be anti-government, and by the suspect's proclivities concerning reading material, he wouldn't really fit any spectrum role nicely. Yeah, we pretty much spent a lot of the first decade of the 2000s with libs being anti-govt and the last few years with the other side being vs increased govt control. Do I think that he was influenced by the anti-government rhetoric being produced by the Tea Party, such as the Palin hit-list? Definitely. Does that make the shooter a bona-fide supporter of the Tea Party movement? Not exactly, but I'd certainly say that the movement should be responsible for its own rhetoric, including all of its complications, no matter how distant. Based on what exactly? If the authorities aren't yet clear about his motivations, where have you divined his influences from then? He could have easily been reading the huffpo for much of the last 10 years and decided the feds were getting out of control. I've yet to see the other side claim any responsibility for much of its own vile and negative rhetoric, nevermind what they accuse the tea partiers of doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommycat Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 No, but it is completely fair to compare liberals to unpatriotic flag burners. News for you I love my country just as much as anyone and while I hate to see the flag disrespected. I will fully defend someone’s right to burn it because of a little thing called the Constitution. Until everyone figures out 1 + 2 does not equal 7 these debates are useless. Just because someone supports certain positions on the left or the right does not make someone a Republican or a Democrat. I should know, I once voted for Reagan and then again Bush, does that make me a Republican? No, I was making a note of his liberal leanings which go further left than your average leftie. I'm making note of things which do not fit the mold of saying he was a tea partier. And calling him a leftist/liberal comes from his classmates who know him better than you or I do. So I'd guess they know him enough to say whether he was left/right. Looking through his ramblings and reading list he could be classified as either. Actually you could say some of his ramblings are far rightist, while others are far leftist. I don't call him either. I call him a nutjob. BUT Since some people here prefer to claim he's a Tea partier, I figured we ought to point out that his classmate says he was a liberal, not a conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I figured we ought to point out that his classmate says he was a liberal, not a conservative.I would say most of my classmates would say I was a conservative and not a liberal because of my stance on the Constitution and finance. I doubt many any here would say the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommycat Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yes, but the difference is that at this point, we don't have an itemized list of his positions on a great many issues. And as you've pointed out, a stance on a specific thing does not make them Liberal/Conservative. Again, I'm not saying he was either. People who know him better than we do have called him Liberal. He was an anarchist, Critical of religion, Includes in his favorite books "The Communist Manifesto" Now tell me how many people here who include those three fall on the right side of the fence? He's also made a point of posting his videos.Here Which indicate to me that he is either a nutjob, or HEAVILY self medicating. Neither of which are specifically left or right. Though conservatives tend to be more anti-drug, as we've seen, some are hypocrites. Honestly this guy may have had serious mental problems. Schizophrenia would be my guess. Which again is not limited to left/right ideology. That in itself is the reason why I get so upset at people who point at this stuff and scream "TEA PARTIERS" every time. It's as if they are saying only the Right can have crazies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Hunger Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 No it's not. We're talking about a bunch of reckless celebrity *******s (Beck, Palin, O'Reilly) who have spent the last 2 years whipping crazy people into a frenzy, and then acting like they have no responsibility when one of those people goes nuts. O'Reilly spent years calling George Tiller a murderer (No he wasn't) and then gets all quiet when some nutjob kills him. What this kind of **** has lead to is pretty similar to all the militia bull**** that went on back in the 90's, the problem now is everyone has the internet, and 24 hour propaganda broadcasts masquerading as news. Yes, let's conveniently point out one side's talking heads as if the other side's are quiet and non-existent. Well, actually, the Lefist talking heads are quiet compared to those on Fox, because they prefer subtlety when spreading emotional discord among our citizenry. This is so idiotic! IT DOESN'T MATTER IF HE BELONGS TO A SIDE OR NOT! THE SIDES ARE MEANINGLESS, ALL THEY DO IS DIVIDE US WHEN THERE ARE EASY POINTS FOR COMPROMISE! Example: Abortion -Leftist View: Freedom of Choice -Rightwing View: Sanctity of Life -Point of Compromise: We need to reduce teen pregnancy. -Solution: Comprehensive sexual education and access to birth control (and yes, I know plenty of Liberals AND Conservatives that agree with this). It's not that hard for us to work together as Americans. Our Founding Fathers did it, so I'd say that it's good enough for us. Why are we letting the news media tell us otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Based on what exactly? If the authorities aren't yet clear about his motivations, where have you divined his influences from then? He could have easily been reading the huffpo for much of the last 10 years and decided the feds were getting out of control. I've yet to see the other side claim any responsibility for much of its own vile and negative rhetoric, nevermind what they accuse the tea partiers of doing.It's a populist movement with populist rhetoric that pulls at peoples emotions, no matter how uncouthly sensationalist it might be. It'd probably be accurate to say that most of its "grassroots" supporters don't really care about the philosophy or ideology behind the movement, but rather, the apparent meaning and charisma associated with it; "Taking the government back," and other messages can be co-opted by anyone for anything, no matter how disassociated it might be. Yes, but the difference is that at this point, we don't have an itemized list of his positions on a great many issues. And as you've pointed out, a stance on a specific thing does not make them Liberal/Conservative. Again, I'm not saying he was either. People who know him better than we do have called him Liberal. He was an anarchist, Critical of religion, Includes in his favorite books "The Communist Manifesto" Now tell me how many people here who include those three fall on the right side of the fence?You forgot to mention that he admired Mein Kampf. However, unlike your Guevara-clad liberal narrative, I don't believe that the shooter adheres to any specific political spectrum, but instead might have been motivated by the rhetoric of the Tea Party movement, without identifying himself with it. He's simply co-opting the message to his own gains, without aligning himself with the message. So although the core philosophy of the Tea Party is not what is being debated as conducive to violence and radicalization, but rather, its own rhetoric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.