Get ready Conservatives...

[skyrider 0]

Quote

We are about to be attacked by the left hiding behind the shield of Jared Loughner.

Although it's clear he was a deranged individual by the time he goes to trial he'll be a deranged right wing individual tea party member in good standing and be capable of quoting Beck, Palin, Hannity, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly.

The left was waiting for something like this to happen. Here is the next 'good crisis that can't be wasted'.

Gawd....must be really sad to live thinking like you are!

Lets see, "Gay" gunman, pissed because he is male, Claims he likes hunting children, so now he is somehow "right wing?"

You hang on to that ...


I will ask my religious friendss to pray for your poor mis guided soul! Myself, I think your already wayyyyyyyy over the deap end!

Try turning on the news from time to time...Turn off them talk radio shows! Seems only you libs listen to them!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Sure, why not
She is not responcible for this nut

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

No

I do not and I did not say that I think it.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[airdvr 210]

?? I think you're preachin to the choir here sky

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Quote

Sure, why not
She is not responcible for this nut

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

Wow...what altitude did you make that leap from? Show me where we know this guy's agenda had anything to do with political ads.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[doughboyshred 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Sure, why not
She is not responcible for this nut

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

Wow...what altitude did you make that leap from? Show me where we know this guy's agenda had anything to do with political ads.

Comment had nothing to do with Loughtner.

Question was should Palin continue to use crosshairs and statements about reloading. Answer was "Sure, why not?"

How about because inciting violence against political opponents could lead to more actual violence against political opponents?

Doesn't matter what this guys agenda was. For some reason he thought it was okay to shoot someone he disagreed with politically.

It's irresponsible for any politicians to be using any sort of campaign strategy that in any way suggests it's okay to do that.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Sorry, I didn't get the part where CBC said he was a tea bagger. Can you provide the link?

My comments were in reference to numerous CBC TV personalities who felt the need to bring up Sarah Palin, her website and her affiliation to the Tea Party movement as if they were related to this event. They (the CBC) does not appear to be dumb enough to post a direct accusation that the gunman was indeed a member of the Tea Party on their website today. But in virtually every page they have on their website concerning this event, they do talk about Sarah Palin. Why? I am NOT a Palin fan, she is NOT someone I want to see as president. But what does she have to do with this event? Oh but if anyone does want some laughs, just read some of the "I hate America" comments by the loyal CBC blogging lemmings.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2011/01/09/arizona-shooting.html#socialcomments

Funny when the Liberal Party of Canada posted a spoofed assassination picture of PM Harper on their official website in December of 2009, the CBC managed to bury that story within hours of it surfacing.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/18003

Why is it that whenever you try to remind the CBC that their pals down at the Liberal Party thought it was funny to post spoofed assassination pictures of their political opponents, the CBC censors you? No if people don't believe that the CBC isn't bias, maybe I can interest them in some beach front vacation property in Bangladesh.

Back on topic ... not enough is known about what motivated Mr Loughner to carry out his murderous crime. From what I can tell he is not talking and the cookie crumbs he left on YouTube point more towards himself being some sort of anarchist versus being affiliated with the Ms Palin, the Tea Party or anyone else. It would be nice to know that as much as politicians (from all parties) suck ass, they need not worry about being assassinated for carrying on a public life.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

I'll actually turn your words and apply them to you. Get ready because you are asking for it.

I'd be careful. Somebody might be reading this and seek blood revenge from what you're saying. AIf there is any act of retaliation, I will hold you are all who similarly accuse a certain group for this to be personally responsible for this. You are deliberately and purposely seekin to inflame the passions of people who may act out in an aggressive and deadly manner.

I predict that you will attempt to either deny your intentions, ignore me, or support what I have to say. Denial will obviously be expected as an attempt to cover up your actions and cover your ass. If you ignore my accusations, the only valid reason for doing so is that you are putting your head in the sand and failing to own up to your responsibilities. Admission will merely verify your guilt.

Therefore, you are inciting violence and soas to not set off any lunatic, you should be forced to tone down your rhetoric.

Hey - just looking looking at you through your lens...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

The Liberal Party of Canada thought it was funny when they posted a spoofed assassination picture of PM Stephen Harper on their official website in December of 2009. It was only after the outrage surfaced from the general public that they pulled it down and then went on to say "the picture does not represent our views". But one has to ask, if a spoofed assassination picture of their political opponent does not represent the views of the Liberal Party of Canada, WTF was it doing on their official website?

http://www.canada.com/news/Liberals+apologize+photo+showing+Harper+being+assassinated/2342953/story.html

Oh but the desire to see Harper murdered is not only on the minds of some Liberals. Take a look at what this guy wrote.

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/7474/harperbullet1vj9.jpg

Of course there is no reference to any political party in this guys rant, so I can't blame the Liberals here. But I think it is safe to say that this fellow is NOT a fan of PM Harper and would be very happy to see the PM assassinated.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Question was should Palin continue to use crosshairs and statements about reloading. Answer was "Sure, why not?"

How about because inciting violence against political opponents could lead to more actual violence against political opponents?

Doesn't matter what this guys agenda was. For some reason he thought it was okay to shoot someone he disagreed with politically.

It's irresponsible for any politicians to be using any sort of campaign strategy that in any way suggests it's okay to do that.

Um - how about that whole "Freedom of Speech" thingy? Oh. I understand it's an old thing made by dead white men who owned slaves. I'll alter the text to make it more along the lines of what you'd like:

***Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech unless someone might possibily be inflamed by such such speech, or of the press unless the press might report the bad and nasty things Tea Partiers right-wingers might say that may inflame nutters mentally ill people;

There's a First Amendment that we can all appreciate!


Of course, you call it "inciting violence." If that was the case, why wasn't this happening months ago???

Personally, I blame Plato for inciting him - hey, the more remote the incitement the more inciteful it's gonna be! Why stop at incitements last year? Let's go back a couple thousand years. The Republic was listed as one of his favorites books. Coincidentally, it is one of my personal favorites and a book that changed my life. Uh oh! I better watch out!

Ban The Republic. Ban the Communist Manifesto. Ban Mein Kampf. They incited him...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[doughboyshred 0]

Quote

Quote

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

I'll actually turn your words and apply them to you. Get ready because you are asking for it.

I'd be careful. Somebody might be reading this and seek blood revenge from what you're saying. AIf there is any act of retaliation, I will hold you are all who similarly accuse a certain group for this to be personally responsible for this. You are deliberately and purposely seekin to inflame the passions of people who may act out in an aggressive and deadly manner.

I predict that you will attempt to either deny your intentions, ignore me, or support what I have to say. Denial will obviously be expected as an attempt to cover up your actions and cover your ass. If you ignore my accusations, the only valid reason for doing so is that you are putting your head in the sand and failing to own up to your responsibilities. Admission will merely verify your guilt.

Therefore, you are inciting violence and soas to not set off any lunatic, you should be forced to tone down your rhetoric.

Hey - just looking looking at you through your lens...

I don't even understand your post.

It makes no sense.

[kallend 2,156]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

I'll actually turn your words and apply them to you. Get ready because you are asking for it.

I'd be careful. Somebody might be reading this and seek blood revenge from what you're saying. AIf there is any act of retaliation, I will hold you are all who similarly accuse a certain group for this to be personally responsible for this. You are deliberately and purposely seekin to inflame the passions of people who may act out in an aggressive and deadly manner.

I predict that you will attempt to either deny your intentions, ignore me, or support what I have to say. Denial will obviously be expected as an attempt to cover up your actions and cover your ass. If you ignore my accusations, the only valid reason for doing so is that you are putting your head in the sand and failing to own up to your responsibilities. Admission will merely verify your guilt.

Therefore, you are inciting violence and soas to not set off any lunatic, you should be forced to tone down your rhetoric.

Hey - just looking looking at you through your lens...

I don't even understand your post.

It makes no sense.

He's a lawyer, that is his job.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[doughboyshred 0]

Quote

Quote

Question was should Palin continue to use crosshairs and statements about reloading. Answer was "Sure, why not?"

How about because inciting violence against political opponents could lead to more actual violence against political opponents?

Doesn't matter what this guys agenda was. For some reason he thought it was okay to shoot someone he disagreed with politically.

It's irresponsible for any politicians to be using any sort of campaign strategy that in any way suggests it's okay to do that.

Um - how about that whole "Freedom of Speech" thingy? Oh. I understand it's an old thing made by dead white men who owned slaves. I'll alter the text to make it more along the lines of what you'd like:

***Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech unless someone might possibily be inflamed by such such speech, or of the press unless the press might report the bad and nasty things Tea Partiers right-wingers might say that may inflame nutters mentally ill people;

There's a First Amendment that we can all appreciate!


Of course, you call it "inciting violence." If that was the case, why wasn't this happening months ago???

Personally, I blame Plato for inciting him - hey, the more remote the incitement the more inciteful it's gonna be! Why stop at incitements last year? Let's go back a couple thousand years. The Republic was listed as one of his favorites books. Coincidentally, it is one of my personal favorites and a book that changed my life. Uh oh! I better watch out!

Ban The Republic. Ban the Communist Manifesto. Ban Mein Kampf. They incited him...

freedom of speech?

What are you talking about?

Hell, they have the right to go out and say whatever they want. That doesn't make it smart. That doesn't make it good for our country.

I never said anything about banning any speech.

Your posts are nonsensical. Have you been drinking heavily?

[lawrocket 3]

So what you're saying is there's a problem with speech you consider "inflammatory" but you aren't looking to do anything about it. Hmmm.

Doesn't that make what you are writing nothing but rhetoric? Additionally, you've put ZERO response to my post on getting to the underlying issue of mental health. I read this to mean you (and everyone else) is utterly uninterested in an actual solution. Rather, you and everyone else would rather engage in heated, inciteful partisan political rhetoric that is not part of any solution and only adds to the problem.

This is exactly what airdvr was talking about. An opening for attack politics was created. No solutions. Nothing. All you have done is attack with your arbitrary subjective standards. Solution? Nope. To solve it would be to take away ammunition.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,121]

>I have funny feeling we have seen the last of Sarah and the rights use
>of politics and gun analogies.

Hopefully. While gun-target analogies and talk about violent/armed overthrow does not cause such incidents, they contribute to an atmosphere that encourages it. Let's hope both sides stop with the anger/hate approach to politics.

[pbwing 0]

Quote

Quote

So, you actually think it's okay for politicians to incite violence against their opposition?

The Liberal Party of Canada thought it was funny when they posted a spoofed assassination picture of PM Stephen Harper on their official website in December of 2009. It was only after the outrage surfaced from the general public that they pulled it down and then went on to say "the picture does not represent our views". But one has to ask, if a spoofed assassination picture of their political opponent does not represent the views of the Liberal Party of Canada, WTF was it doing on their official website?

http://www.canada.com/news/Liberals+apologize+photo+showing+Harper+being+assassinated/2342953/story.html

Oh but the desire to see Harper murdered is not only on the minds of some Liberals. Take a look at what this guy wrote.

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/7474/harperbullet1vj9.jpg

Of course there is no reference to any political party in this guys rant, so I can't blame the Liberals here. But I think it is safe to say that this fellow is NOT a fan of PM Harper and would be very happy to see the PM assassinated.

If you think that the Liberal Party of Canada was actually trying to incite or advocate the assassination of the PM, then you really are not better than the morons on here and all over the net today who think that Sarah Palin was advocating or is responsible for the attack yesterday...

[Amazon 7]

Quote

So what you're saying is there's a problem with speech you consider "inflammatory" but you aren't looking to do anything about it. Hmmm.

Doesn't that make what you are writing nothing but rhetoric? Additionally, you've put ZERO response to my post on getting to the underlying issue of mental health. I read this to mean you (and everyone else) is utterly uninterested in an actual solution. Rather, you and everyone else would rather engage in heated, inciteful partisan political rhetoric that is not part of any solution and only adds to the problem.

This is exactly what airdvr was talking about. An opening for attack politics was created. No solutions. Nothing. All you have done is attack with your arbitrary subjective standards. Solution? Nope. To solve it would be to take away ammunition.

Who was it again that GUTTED the funding for mental institutions accross the USA again.

When I was a kid drunks who lived on the streets were known as BUMS and lived on Skid Row.

Then thousands upon thousands of menatlly ill people were turned out of institutions.
They are the homeless that an exceedingly high number of are mentally ill.

About 25% of the prison population should be in mental institutions.. not prison.

But then our compassionate conservatives who are far from anything of the sort, want to further cut "social programs" that would have helped those people like Cho or Loughner, there is no program.

Ya caint have it both ways councilor. If you want to kepp guns out of the hands of those who are mentally defective... as the law requires... perhaps supporting some of those social programs that would identify.. and heaven forbid TREAT the mentally defective, and let us know who the fuck is out there to NOT sell guns to. The signs were there in the case of Loughner being a nutter. If the college could have reported his eratic behavior to SOME social program to get him some help... maybe 6 people would still be alive. I would say many THOUSANDS of others would

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

If you think that the Liberal Party of Canada was actually trying to incite or advocate the assassination of the PM, then you really are not better than the morons on here and all over the net today who think that Sarah Palin was advocating or is responsible for the attack yesterday.

Of course I DID NOT THINK Liberals were actually serious in their calls for a Harper assassination. It was merely an example of stupid Liberal humor and an example for Leftists here to ponder that they can not claim the high ground today.

Tell me did you think posting a picture of their opponent being assassinated on their official political party website funny? Hopefully the answer was no, hopefully if/when you heard about such nonsense being displayed it made you stop and ask yourself "who exactly are these people who work down at the Liberal Party of Canada" (a political organization that does not even practice democracy inside of it's own organization when it comes to picking their leader and their riding candidates).

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[muff528 3]

Quote

Quote

So what you're saying is there's a problem with speech you consider "inflammatory" but you aren't looking to do anything about it. Hmmm.

Doesn't that make what you are writing nothing but rhetoric? Additionally, you've put ZERO response to my post on getting to the underlying issue of mental health. I read this to mean you (and everyone else) is utterly uninterested in an actual solution. Rather, you and everyone else would rather engage in heated, inciteful partisan political rhetoric that is not part of any solution and only adds to the problem.

This is exactly what airdvr was talking about. An opening for attack politics was created. No solutions. Nothing. All you have done is attack with your arbitrary subjective standards. Solution? Nope. To solve it would be to take away ammunition.

Who was it again that GUTTED the funding for mental institutions accross the USA again.

When I was a kid drunks who lived on the streets were known as BUMS and lived on Skid Row.

Then thousands upon thousands of menatlly ill people were turned out of institutions.
They are the homeless that an exceedingly high number of are mentally ill.

About 25% of the prison population should be in mental institutions.. not prison.

But then our compassionate conservatives who are far from anything of the sort, want to further cut "social programs" that would have helped those people like Cho or Loughner, there is no program.

Ya caint have it both ways councilor. If you want to kepp guns out of the hands of those who are mentally defective... as the law requires... perhaps supporting some of those social programs that would identify.. and heaven forbid TREAT the mentally defective, and let us know who the fuck is out there to NOT sell guns to. The signs were there in the case of Loughner being a nutter. If the college could have reported his eratic behavior to SOME social program to get him some help... maybe 6 people would still be alive. I would say many THOUSANDS of others would

It seems that Cho was diagnosed early and treated during his school years. He apparently got the guns as a result of a failure by Virginia to report his illness to the Fed Govt. so no record of his problem was revealed when he purchased the guns. Laws were changed to prevent this from happening. All according to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre

Nothing for Loughner yet.

[doughboyshred 0]

Quote

So what you're saying is there's a problem with speech you consider "inflammatory" but you aren't looking to do anything about it. Hmmm.

Doesn't that make what you are writing nothing but rhetoric? Additionally, you've put ZERO response to my post on getting to the underlying issue of mental health. I read this to mean you (and everyone else) is utterly uninterested in an actual solution. Rather, you and everyone else would rather engage in heated, inciteful partisan political rhetoric that is not part of any solution and only adds to the problem.

This is exactly what airdvr was talking about. An opening for attack politics was created. No solutions. Nothing. All you have done is attack with your arbitrary subjective standards. Solution? Nope. To solve it would be to take away ammunition.

I see why you're a lawyer. You argue an issue other than what's being discussed in a circular way.

Like I said, the politicians should stop inciting violence through their attack ads and negative campaigning.

The solution is to not vote for the fuckers that do that, which is exactly why I left the republican party after the tea baggers came in to play.

[doughboyshred 0]

Quote

>I have funny feeling we have seen the last of Sarah and the rights use
>of politics and gun analogies.

Hopefully. While gun-target analogies and talk about violent/armed overthrow does not cause such incidents, they contribute to an atmosphere that encourages it. Let's hope both sides stop with the anger/hate approach to politics.

Exactly. Very well put.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

>I have funny feeling we have seen the last of Sarah and the rights use
>of politics and gun analogies.

Hopefully. While gun-target analogies and talk about violent/armed overthrow does not cause such incidents, they contribute to an atmosphere that encourages it. Let's hope both sides stop with the anger/hate approach to politics.

Exactly. Very well put.

You really think that a CGI Cross Hair over a picture, on a website, that he probably never even visited, facilitated the shooting of the Congresswoman?

I do agree that the hate should stop - but - the other is just rediculous.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Sure, why not
She is not responcible for this nut

Try listening to Gifford talk about what Palin was doing to her.

Kind of makes one sick to their stomach.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7046bo92a4&feature=player_embedded#!

[billvon 3,121]

>You really think that a CGI Cross Hair over a picture, on a website, that
>he probably never even visited, facilitated the shooting of the
>Congresswoman?

To reiterate:

Gun-target analogies and talk about violent/armed overthrow does NOT cause such incidents. They do contribute to an atmosphere that encourages it. Hopefully this will be a wake-up call to the people who advocate such things.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Sure, why not
She is not responcible for this nut

Try listening to Gifford talk about what Palin was doing to her.

Kind of makes one sick to their stomach.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7046bo92a4&feature=player_embedded#!

You are correct
Gifford and the MSNBC reporters do make my stomach turn

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

You saw it coming huh

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47338.html

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln