political rhetorical tone & the shooting of a Congress woman

[matt0611]

Do you guys remember when the FT Hood shooting happend and the media was quick to judge terrorism? Oh no? me neither, all I heard was "lets not jump to conclusions" "urge caution" etc from government officials, cable news pundits, online news etc but in in this case they were crucifying Palin about an hour after in happened with almost no evidence of any connection whatsoever?

Do you guys also remember after the Discovery channel hostage taking when the media was calling for us to tone down the global warming and environmental rhetoric and hysteria? No? Me neither

Do you guys remember when the media urged to tone down the liberal rhetoric after Clay Duke attempted to shoot a school board after painting a V for Vendetta sign, railing against the rich on the internet, linking to liberal websites like media matters etc ? No? Me neither, he just had a mental illness or was angry etc

You guys remember the outrage when Obama made gun analogies "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun" - Obama
No? I don't either

Anybody remember the outrage of the rhetoric during the bush years when talks of "revolution", Bush = Hitler, hitler mustaches, calls for assassination, republicans = nazis, signs with bush's heads cut off?
I don't remember the outrage either...

Even a lot of things on the guys websites are clearly not tea party or conservative ideas. Burning the flag, listing mein kampf and the communist manifesto as his favorite books, dressing up as a terrorist etc

A former class-mate of his describing him as "Left wing, very liberal".

Never mind that this guy met with the congresswoman in 2007 and had negative things to say about her when the tea party didn't even exist and hardly anyone even heard of sarah palin.

Then all the evidence that this guy is clearly has some mental problems but no, hes just a right-wing wacko whos influenced by talk radio and sarah palin to do this right?

Even though some left-wing websites had very similar images of giffords with a bullseye, a blog entry on the daily kos headline proclaiming she is "Dead to Me" because she didn't vote for Pelosi as speaker. Isn't that just as much evidence as the Sarah Palin poster?

Interesting how those things work huh?

There was absolutely no real hard evidence connecting this guy to conservatives, the tea party, or sarah palin. There was almost just as much evidence pointing him to be a liberal. (In reality he is most likely neither, just mentally ill)

Now i'm not saying that all the rhetoric from conservatives or the tea party is right, but to immediately blame someone without hardly even getting the shooters name is really distasteful.

Look, I really really dislike Sarah Palin and wish she would just go away from politics but really guys? Give it a rest.

Liberals are justified in expressing alarm over the coarsening of the political dialogue. But people who rushed to blame conservative causes or leaders for the killings should pause and consider whether they, too, are waving a bloody shirt and feeding a culture of denunciation.

Why did this kid never get the mental help he obviously needed, and how did someone who obviously has some mental problems (hell, a community college wouldn't admit him because of it) able to get access to a firearm? Aren't these questions more pertinent?

The fact that the media and others were so quick to blame this on its political enemies without virtually any evidence is sickening and a fucking discrace.

 

[Jaskalas]

Now i'm not saying that all the rhetoric from conservatives or the tea party is right, but to immediately blame someone without hardly even getting the shooters name is really distasteful.

It's not merely distasteful, it is violent disdain for your fellow American. What we witnessed in reaction to the tragedy were many more able and willing fellows crazy enough to repeat it.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/1...mate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

Firing back hard...

 

[boomerang]

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/1...mate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

Firing back hard...

Gee whiz, those lefties can get awfully loony. Violent too. We must find out who is inciting them to these extremes and put a stop to it.

Or, we can ignore them knowing that they are a fringe element and not representative of liberals as a whole. That would a very tolerant attitude though, wouldn't it?

 

[Gamingphreek]

You know, I just can't get enough of foreigners telling me what they feel is wrong in my country.

What's amazed me over the years is how the liberal mind feels that others are as easily influenced as they are. The idea that every thought, feeling and desire has been brought upon by some influence, some external force and that if that force is controlled and channeled in the proper way, that the outcomes will be different. Social engineering. You're practicing it here.

Violent acts of this nature are very few and far between. But in the liberal mind, these cannot be accepted as simply the acts of madmen, there must be an explanation. A reason and a "cure" must be found. No cost is too great either.

I have a sister who is bipolar. Manic depressive was the term used for many decades prior. The earlier term describes it far, far better. My wife had a terrible time trying to figure out why my sister did and said the things she did. My wife kept saying things like "it just doesn't make any sense." She was right of course, but the flaw in her thinking was that she was trying to apply reason to behavior that is unreasonable by its very nature. She was trying to apply the form of logic a sane person uses to the behavior of someone who is insane.

There are bad people in this world. Always have been and always will be. That is the explanation for the shootings in Arizona.

Your attitude that those of us that don't agree with your view of the world should roll over and adapt to your ways is unrealistic. Your post I quoted above is all over the map. You applaud the efforts of Glenn Beck and then later in the post belittle him. You are guilty of what you accuse those on the right of doing. You too, should learn to treat those on the right not as your enemy. Or is your side the one of "correctness"?

Within minutes of this event occurring, the media, the bloggers, the pundits on the left were all over this story with the angle that the shootings were the responsibility of the right. The name of the shooter wasn't known and the fate of those shot was not either. With virtually no information, the left had already made up its mind.

If you want to foist the blame for the state of my nation on my ideology, I will not accept that. But I will be more tolerant of your opinion than you sir, are of mine.

Awesome post, sir!!

 

[LTC8K6]

Gee whiz, those lefties can get awfully loony. Violent too. We must find out who is inciting them to these extremes and put a stop to it.

Or, we can ignore them knowing that they are a fringe element and not representative of liberals as a whole. That would a very tolerant attitude though, wouldn't it?

Ignoring it no longer works, imo.

It used to work, but not any more. You have to defend yourself these days, or you'll get buried by a false story.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voicemail-phone-message?page=1

Long grudge against Giffords...

 

[piasabird]

This is kind of like the speaker of the house carrying a giant mallet to a tea party political rally attempting to egg on some violence.

 

[Linflas]

This is kind of like the speaker of the house carrying a giant mallet to a tea party political rally attempting to egg on some violence.

Which didn't work so they just made up stuff and disseminated it through the media. To this day not one video of racial slurs has surfaced and the "spitting" was one over the top individual yelling so loudly that he was "spraying it" as well as saying it.

 

[Phokus]

BECK: Hang on, let me just tell you what I'm thinking. I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out -- is this wrong? I stopped wearing my What Would Jesus -- band -- Do, and I've lost all sense of right and wrong now. I used to be able to say, "Yeah, I'd kill Michael Moore," and then I'd see the little band: What Would Jesus Do? And then I'd realize, "Oh, you wouldn't kill Michael Moore. Or at least you wouldn't choke him to death." And you know, well, I'm not sure. - Glenn Beck

This is the type of rhetoric we have to deal with from the media darlings and leaders of the right.

Also, i'm going to quote a conservative ATPNer here:

I'm a conservative, but find this kind of behavior absolutely reprehensible. I recently went to a backyard cookout with a few neighbors (this is an almost 100% 'Republican' area), and was shocked at: A) How fucking idiotic most of them were and B) How often I heard people talking about assassinating the POTUS and other 'liberals/commies'

-Arkaign

Lets be honest, conservatives can get away with saying some really deranged things on air/to their constituents.

 

[Gamingphreek]

BECK: Hang on, let me just tell you what I'm thinking. I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out -- is this wrong? I stopped wearing my What Would Jesus -- band -- Do, and I've lost all sense of right and wrong now. I used to be able to say, "Yeah, I'd kill Michael Moore," and then I'd see the little band: What Would Jesus Do? And then I'd realize, "Oh, you wouldn't kill Michael Moore. Or at least you wouldn't choke him to death." And you know, well, I'm not sure. - Glenn Beck

This is the type of rhetoric we have to deal with from the media darlings and leaders of the right.

Also, i'm going to quote a conservative ATPNer here:



-Arkaign

Lets be honest, conservatives can get away with saying some really deranged things on air/to their constituents.

Give me a break - it isn't isolated to the Conservatives -_- Liberals and Conservatives alike are disrespectful to each other.

 

[sandorski]

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/1...mate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

Firing back hard...

fail

 

[Amused]

fail

Only in your biased little mind.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Only in your biased little mind.

The projection is strong with him.

 

[sandorski]

Only in your biased little mind.

The projection is strong with him.

negative

 

[werepossum]

Do you guys remember when the FT Hood shooting happend and the media was quick to judge terrorism? Oh no? me neither, all I heard was "lets not jump to conclusions" "urge caution" etc from government officials, cable news pundits, online news etc but in in this case they were crucifying Palin about an hour after in happened with almost no evidence of any connection whatsoever?

Do you guys also remember after the Discovery channel hostage taking when the media was calling for us to tone down the global warming and environmental rhetoric and hysteria? No? Me neither

Do you guys remember when the media urged to tone down the liberal rhetoric after Clay Duke attempted to shoot a school board after painting a V for Vendetta sign, railing against the rich on the internet, linking to liberal websites like media matters etc ? No? Me neither, he just had a mental illness or was angry etc

You guys remember the outrage when Obama made gun analogies "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun" - Obama
No? I don't either

Anybody remember the outrage of the rhetoric during the bush years when talks of "revolution", Bush = Hitler, hitler mustaches, calls for assassination, republicans = nazis, signs with bush's heads cut off?
I don't remember the outrage either...

Even a lot of things on the guys websites are clearly not tea party or conservative ideas. Burning the flag, listing mein kampf and the communist manifesto as his favorite books, dressing up as a terrorist etc

A former class-mate of his describing him as "Left wing, very liberal".

Never mind that this guy met with the congresswoman in 2007 and had negative things to say about her when the tea party didn't even exist and hardly anyone even heard of sarah palin.

Then all the evidence that this guy is clearly has some mental problems but no, hes just a right-wing wacko whos influenced by talk radio and sarah palin to do this right?

Even though some left-wing websites had very similar images of giffords with a bullseye, a blog entry on the daily kos headline proclaiming she is "Dead to Me" because she didn't vote for Pelosi as speaker. Isn't that just as much evidence as the Sarah Palin poster?

Interesting how those things work huh?

There was absolutely no real hard evidence connecting this guy to conservatives, the tea party, or sarah palin. There was almost just as much evidence pointing him to be a liberal. (In reality he is most likely neither, just mentally ill)

Now i'm not saying that all the rhetoric from conservatives or the tea party is right, but to immediately blame someone without hardly even getting the shooters name is really distasteful.

Look, I really really dislike Sarah Palin and wish she would just go away from politics but really guys? Give it a rest.

Liberals are justified in expressing alarm over the coarsening of the political dialogue. But people who rushed to blame conservative causes or leaders for the killings should pause and consider whether they, too, are waving a bloody shirt and feeding a culture of denunciation.

Why did this kid never get the mental help he obviously needed, and how did someone who obviously has some mental problems (hell, a community college wouldn't admit him because of it) able to get access to a firearm? Aren't these questions more pertinent?

The fact that the media and others were so quick to blame this on its political enemies without virtually any evidence is sickening and a fucking discrace.

Very well said. It's also worth pointing out that if a government college bars you as being dangerous, that needs to show up on an instant background check. I'm not saying that should automatically end your Second Amendment rights, but it's serious enough that a law enforcement professional needs to interview you before a firearm purchased is authorized. Keeping firearms out of the hands of the potentially violent and disturbed people is an important part of the background checks.

 

[boomerang]

Ignoring it no longer works, imo.

It used to work, but not any more. You have to defend yourself these days, or you'll get buried by a false story.

Truly sad isn't it?

 

[dali71]

fail

Then perhaps you can fire up your primitive little brain and refute what she posted.

 

[werepossum]

People still don't get it. You can discuss and respect and reason all you want with just words, but eventually one side or the other becomes law and has REAL effects and consequences on individual lives, and people are going to be angry and not want to give up what they have rightfully earned.

Until this is realized, the political divide in this country will continue to grow. I don't care how civil you are when you agree to disagree, but when it becomes a law and somebody somewhere ends up losing something personally valuable to them, it becomes REAL and is no longer just 'lively debate'; they are going to get angry. Politics isn't arguing about whether the color red or blue is better than the color green, and agreeing to disagree and walk away. Politics creates laws and uses threat of force to take things from people, tell them what they are allowed to own, what kind of car they are allowed to drive, how to raise their family, how much energy they are allowed to use, how much income they are allowed to earn, etc. People can't just walk away and agree to disagree when things are taken from them or their life altered negatively in some way.

Hence, government that governs least governs best. Lay out the basic rules about keeping your hands to yourself, but otherwise allow people to make their own decisions and don't interfere or force someone to take sides.

It's painful listening to how many people spout off about liberty and freedom and being a proud American on the 4th of July, or whenever there is a war, or disaster, but then these freedom loving wannabes will turn right around and bitch and moan about how there should be a law against something somebody 1000 miles away from them is doing.

Excellent post.

You know, I just can't get enough of foreigners telling me what they feel is wrong in my country.

What's amazed me over the years is how the liberal mind feels that others are as easily influenced as they are. The idea that every thought, feeling and desire has been brought upon by some influence, some external force and that if that force is controlled and channeled in the proper way, that the outcomes will be different. Social engineering. You're practicing it here.

Violent acts of this nature are very few and far between. But in the liberal mind, these cannot be accepted as simply the acts of madmen, there must be an explanation. A reason and a "cure" must be found. No cost is too great either.

I have a sister who is bipolar. Manic depressive was the term used for many decades prior. The earlier term describes it far, far better. My wife had a terrible time trying to figure out why my sister did and said the things she did. My wife kept saying things like "it just doesn't make any sense." She was right of course, but the flaw in her thinking was that she was trying to apply reason to behavior that is unreasonable by its very nature. She was trying to apply the form of logic a sane person uses to the behavior of someone who is insane.

There are bad people in this world. Always have been and always will be. That is the explanation for the shootings in Arizona.

Your attitude that those of us that don't agree with your view of the world should roll over and adapt to your ways is unrealistic. Your post I quoted above is all over the map. You applaud the efforts of Glenn Beck and then later in the post belittle him. You are guilty of what you accuse those on the right of doing. You too, should learn to treat those on the right not as your enemy. Or is your side the one of "correctness"?

Within minutes of this event occurring, the media, the bloggers, the pundits on the left were all over this story with the angle that the shootings were the responsibility of the right. The name of the shooter wasn't known and the fate of those shot was not either. With virtually no information, the left had already made up its mind.

If you want to foist the blame for the state of my nation on my ideology, I will not accept that. But I will be more tolerant of your opinion than you sir, are of mine.

Another excellent post. Anyone familiar with the mentally ill has to learn to stop asking why they do something, because we'll never understand it. Unfortunately the left isn't trying to understand this guy's behavior, merely exploit it. Malkin makes an excellent point about the left calling for violence (thanks LTC8K6) but neglects to see that similar examples can be found on the right. Crazy people are crazy.

And I quoted exdeath's post first to show the reason for all the hatred - a very powerful government which touches every facet of our lives. Both political parties are in love with using the armed might and sanctions of government to make others behave as we might wish them to behave. We (both sides) need to agree to maximize personal freedom - to agree that if we want to be free to do as we wish, we have to accept other people doing things we don't like. And we have to agree that from time to time crazy people and/or evil people will abuse that freedom.

 

[sandorski]

Then perhaps you can fire up your primitive little brain and refute what she posted.

Srsly, Michele Malkin? She probably said/Blogged something worse than any of those examples within the last week.

Nothing like comparing placards/T-Shirts few have even seen before to a 24 hour "News" network, a huge portion of AM Radio, the Author of this list and declaring some kind of equivalence.

Fail, srsly.

 

[Amused]

Srsly, Michele Malkin? She probably said/Blogged something worse than any of those examples within the last week.

Nothing like comparing placards/T-Shirts few have even seen before to a 24 hour "News" network, a huge portion of AM Radio, the Author of this list and declaring some kind of equivalence.

Fail, srsly.

Did you ever stop to think your bias makes you notice one, and not the other?

 

[sandorski]

Did you ever stop to think your bias makes you notice one, and not the other?

Did you ever stop to Think?

No, my bias hasn't blinded me, but it seems it may have blinded you. Michele Malkin, how much more do you need to know?

 

[dali71]

Srsly, Michele Malkin? She probably said/Blogged something worse than any of those examples within the last week.

Nothing like comparing placards/T-Shirts few have even seen before to a 24 hour "News" network, a huge portion of AM Radio, the Author of this list and declaring some kind of equivalence.

Fail, srsly.

Please cite specific examples of things she said/blogged that were worse, and also refute what she actually posted.

 

[Amused]

Did you ever stop to Think?

No, my bias hasn't blinded me, but it seems it may have blinded you. Michele Malkin, how much more do you need to know?

All I know is that you are attacking the messenger without addressing the facts.

 

[woolfe9999]

I have a few comments to add to this discussion before I return to hibernation.

The notion that his act was politically motivated is not incompatible with the notion that the shooter was "mentally ill." Asserting that it must either be one or the other is a logical fallacy, that of posing a false dichotomy. One may be mentally ill but influenced to engage in a certain behavior by environmental factors. That could include rhetoric of any variety, political or otherwise.

While it is essentially certain that the shooter was "mentally ill," no one here knows enough about him or is qualified to diagnose "schizophrenia." The two terms should not be used interchangeably.

The shooter's political orientation is somewhat unclear based on bits and pieces of information that have thus far been released. He has been described as "paranoid about government." He apparently believed that the government faked 911. He has also been described as "politically extreme" by people who knew him, though so far no one has specifically said right or left. It is very possible to be politically extreme without being easily identifiable as *either* right or left. Many conspiracy theorists fall into that category.

The conspiratorial thinking, particularly the 9/11 trutherism, was generally associated with either liberals or libertarians during the Bush administration. It is unclear whether he is either of these. Comments about him wanting "chaos" may suggest he is some sort of anarchist. That is probably the best bet at this point. Other comments suggest that he has antipathy toward the entire political establishment. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he hates Sarah Palin as much as he hates Barack Obama or Gabby Giffords.

Distrust of government has been a growing trend in this country since Vietnam and Watergate. Anti-government paranoia was more common on the left 30 years ago and has become more common on the right in the past 2 decades. However, it remains quite common on both ends of the spectrum. It has also increased in toto over the past 10 years by a considerable amount. Given how rampant our cultural distrust of government has become, it is actually a surprise that this is the first incident of a U.S. Congressman being shot since Leo Ryan back in the 1970's. The vast majority of our paranoid rhetoric is talk without attendant will for action, and hence events like these are isolated and relatively far apart.

- wolf