Customize

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by the anti, Jan 8, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dude. I'm a leftie as well, but your rants ITT almost make me wish I had an Ignore button. I like a fair amount of what you say, but idk what to say other than "switch to decaf."
  2. ziptang Member

    Then you have zero problem with Palins map, right?

    And you DO have a problem with this, right?

    http://img.printfection.com/9/10721827/jTzO5.jpg
  3. Zak McKracken Member

    ^
    fifm
  4. thevoxbox Member

    Okay... I think most of us can agree that no politician or commentator is directly responsible for the shooter's actions. With that being said, I personally get very nervous when a politician employs violent rhetoric in their speeches. I feel like there's a couple of reasons why this is.

    1. Speeches are nearly always designed to persuade people to a specific opinion or incite them to a particular action.

    2. Speeches are often (but not always) written by speech-writers, rather than the politician themselves, which means they are professionally groomed to obtain the results mentioned above.

    I'm not really a politically active person, but when I hear politicians attempting to incite emotion in people for political reasons (usually to get votes), it honestly does worry me that they add violent suggestions into it. A person who has been whipped into an emotional frenzy isn't always going to be thinking about whether that last remark was metaphor or not. I feel like it leads to much more division between people of different parties than there has to be, making politics emotionally charged, rather than logically.

    Is it more common for someone to throw a punch out of sheer rage or a well-reasoned disagreement with their foe's stance?

    If a person went around talking about how much they hated their next door neighbor's shrubberies and how they wish someone would just burn them down, and then one day it turned out that some crazy guy blew up the neighbor's home, taking the shrubbery with it... is it so inconceivable that people might (mistakenly or not) want to blame at least part of it on the person who hoped for something similar?

    I'm not saying it's right to blame her, but it honestly doesn't seem like a stretch to understand why the automatic response is to want to do so.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Miranda Member

    The rhetoric in the US has been very extreme for quite a while now. The problem gets worse when one or both sides (and I've been guilty here) overstate their position. Then the other side defaults to arguing against to the overstatement, which is a lot easier than addressing the real issues.
    • Like Like x 5
  6. anonymous9 Member

    Astronaut Scott Kelly:
    http://www.democracynow.org/2011/1/...ther_in_law_sends_message_of_peace_from_space

    Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, one day before she was shot:
    http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/01/gabrielle-giffords-trey-grayson-email-arizona-shooting.html
  7. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Part of our problem, at least in Amurka, is that we've not done well at preserving the art of being able to argue both sides. We tend to stuff our minds with the soothing echoes of our own existing beliefs and prejudices, accepting the ready availability of such echoes as de facto proof of their correctness while ignoring their counterparts. Then, when we encounter an intelligent opponent, we're not ready to engage them logically, and fisticuffs ensue instead.
    • Like Like x 4
  8. Rockyj Member

    Just saying...


    http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/11/julian-assange-violent-rhetoric-will-spark-more-shooting-spre/
    • Like Like x 2
  9. DeathHamster Member

    http://www.pointofinquiry.org/why_facts_fail_brendan_nyhan/
    • Like Like x 1
  10. xenubarb Member

    Can you see that there is a huge difference between posting on a blog like DailyKOS and saying the same things on a mass media platform of TV and radio? Palin's words go much farther than some guy's blog on KOS.
    • Like Like x 2
  11. anonymous9 Member

    Makes me long for the days of Goldwater or Wm F Buckley. I usually didn't agree with their positions, but at least they were able to present a thoughtful, intelligent argument.

    What irks me the most about the current situation is the great lengths to which the Right and the MSM(the two groups that profit the most from the vitriolic partisan rhetoric) are going, to defend themselves and argue that it has nothing to do with the violence.
  12. xenubarb Member

  13. Onanymous Member

    I wonder why Sarah Palin removed her map of targets from her site.
  14. anonymous9 Member

  15. Miranda Member

    Absolutely.
  16. AnonOfStout Member

    I can't believe I just read the last five pages of this thread. To hell with the right wing, to hell with the left wing. And especially to hell with all you assholes wasting valuable typing time over it. We could be defending free speech, or making funny shoops, or whatever instead.

    I don't care about either side. I'm certainly not going to expend any energy arguing over the internet about it. My interaction with either side of the aisle amounts to spraying whichever monkey(s) happen to be throwing the most shit with a hose of ridicule and derision. Which is just about everyone in this thread that's done more than lament a psycho's violence.

    So... *ridicule, deride, ridicule, ridicule, deride, little more ridicule*

    I'm getting a drink now. Thread sucked after page two. Gotta wash the taste out of my mouth.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Rockyj Member

    Yes I admit I am passionate about these murders & realize no one really knows why this asshole did what he did. But I noticed the Right backing away from this & not making & real public comments about this until Monday. Why is that? Why so defensive? Wouldn't they have been just outraged?

    The real issue & its nice to see a Republican taking it on:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/11/peter-king-strict-gun-control_n_807323.html
  18. DeathHamster Member

    So we can beat government officials with clubs without having to worry about intervention by someone holding?

    How are they supposed to enforce this cow-flop proposal, provide Secret Service protection to every government official or set up TSA searches?
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Paroxetine Samurai Moderator

    Probably because once word got up about this shooting, one of her staff or her thought "Oh Shi--- Better remove it before somebody makes a link between this whack job and this pic!!!11"

    Again, I have serious doubts that this nutter was politically motivated. In my opinion, it is possible the voices told him to do it and that there was 72 virgin rats waiting for his bung hole when he an herroed himself. (Note to Xenubarb: Please don't take offense to the rat reference.)

    The guy seems mentally unstable. Maybe in addition to the political and media circus, we can expect some Scientology rhetoric? Maybe Tom Cruise will say he could have been the only one to help or stop it because "he knows"?
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Government officials can no longer go on hunting trips with other people.


    The problem wasn't that the guy brought a gun within 1000 feet of a government official, the problem was that he shot people with it.
    • Like Like x 3
  21. ziptang Member

    Violent political rhetoric has been part of America since day one and even before. There used to be fights in Congress, and lots of dueling.
    • Like Like x 1
  22. ziptang Member

    Not everything in life is a joke. I doubt you will think so when it's your ox being gored. Or maybe you will.
  23. ziptang Member

    Well, that's what I do, but I do it because I'm always right.
  24. the anti Member

    someone should go with a big sign saying fred phelps eats dick
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Onanymous Member

    • Like Like x 3
  26. Paroxetine Samurai Moderator

    I rather liked when the Nerds stood up to WBC back during the Comiccon.

    I would hold up a sign that says what you have said or "Fucking Magic Magnets: How do they work?"
  27. Zak McKracken Member

    CatAndMice.jpg
  28. Bipolart Member

    Fred Phelps SCOHB
  29. LRonAnon Member

    I didn't know the worldwide web was so limited in its reach. I see you're all for placing limits on freedom of speech, for some anyway. If BloBoy had something worth reading he would have an audience. Its about the open opportunity to make your say; if people like it, they will come and you will rise.

    I also noticed you stated yelling "fire" in a theater is a legal limit on free speech. It's an outdated law with the advent of modern building codes and things like smoke alarms. Now if someone began yodeling "Alla hu Akbar" in a theater ....I would be scared to death. (there 'outta be a law)

    *******************

    I've been watching this thread. It's full of partisan schlong sucking and hypocrisy, absolutely silly. There seems to be some belief that we as humans beings are above being animals, we're not. 50 years ago this guy would have been noticed and locked up in the asylum for the rest of his life, before that; let to wonder the streets as the village idiot, before that he would have been driven away from town or simply killed.

    If you REALLY want to know what increases the problem with schizophrenics, it's input stimuli: The web, TV, radio, news papers, cars, big cities that run 24/7, and the ultra-fast unattached lifestyle we live today. They get lost in it and the complications of the mega-stimuli can go anywhere in a confused mind. Rhetoric, political confrontation and violence began about 15 minutes after humans discovered how to communicate, we are built for it (flight or flight et al.).

    Modern society complicates schizophrenia, maybe we should outlaw modern society. If an untreated schizophrenic is bent on killing someone, they will tear them apart with their bare hands.


    spikeisgonnagetraept.jpg


    If I were a lefty: I would 'prolly try to silence the conservatives too, it's gonna kill'em in the next election.
  30. LRonAnon Member

    Just because you think they are responsible doesn't make it so. In fact they aren't responsible, you're just all worked up like a foamy latte.

    The kid is schitzo, the stucco ceiling of his bedroom could have told him to do it.
  31. LRonAnon Member

    In three years nobody has said that DM's speeches are responsible for the death of Eli Perkins.

    Sure there is militaristic and psycotic culture in Scientology, and yet everyone seems to accept that it was a lack of medication and proper treatment per the cults thetan removal system.

    HEY! I just found a good project for those who believe the tripe. We can call it "project retro-rhetoric." DM killed Eli.

    jeremyelli.jpg
  32. Miranda Member

    Thanks for updating us on your activities and opinions. Feel free to post in threads that do interest you.
    • Like Like x 1
  33. LRonAnon Member

    You have to admit that she does troll hard. I do love watching the reactions to her ( like this thread).

    ;)
    • Like Like x 2
  34. incog712 Member

    It's clear enough that no specific piece of political rhetoric reached into this guys head and told him to kill, though the aggregate coming from any number of directions might have had some influence.

    None the less, Palin's peeps made a conscious decision to pander to a certain element of their base by setting up photo ops of Palin firing weapons, tossing out slogans such as "don't retreat, RELOAD", placing gunsight images over political opponents, etc. etc. etc.

    All fine and good until one day one of these opponents (along with a whole crowd of others) just happens to get taken out by some lunatic. An opponent who had already voiced concern over the way she was being targeted and the potential risks involved, calling out Palin specifically.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation. Palin isn't guilty of anything beyond poor judgement, something that she'a not at all alone in. Still, she's toast from a political standpoint. It's neither the left or right wing that will insure that. It's the deep pocketed political donors that make or break a candidates ability to run a presidential campaign. Donors that don't give a damn about anything but their own self interests. Donors that won't be picking up their phones when Sarah comes a calling.

    It's one thing for bloggers, arm-chair political pundits, and radio stars to engage in outrageous verbiage, but if you're thinking of running for president, you need to keep your own nose clean, especially within a few months of when you'd need to begin organizing your campaign.
    • Like Like x 1
  35. Too bad Peter King's a dick. Besides, to the wrong lunatic, 1,000 feet isn't that far at all, nor would such a law be a deterrent to someone like Jared Loughner. I don't think the solution is to further infringe upon liberty. Instead, I think a better and more lasting solution is to focus on restoring sanity to political discourse. If people would realize the person on the other side of the aisle is their neighbor instead of their enemy, if Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, Sharon Angle, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh would STFU, this nation will be a better place. This real issue has yet to be addressed by ANYONE of import on the right.
  36. Miranda Member

    I agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for you please to rephrase it. I so share your indignation and contempt for these people. I know the gratification that comes from venting that rage. But merely insulting them just inflames the discussion more. Better to focus on specific actions and arguments and in that way attempt to restore sanity to this particular political discourse.
    • Like Like x 1
  37. LRonAnon Member

    You're right, its not clear at all. let me explain....

    I had someone, who saw me on TV while he was buying cigarettes. I was being interviewed at the traveling Vietnam memorial wall, innocent enough. Well when the police finally apprehended him, nekkid on the roof of the cigarette store. He explained to the cops that -I- had told him to rob the cigarette store; that -I- had told him to "rob that guy" right thought TV mounted behind the cashier. It was his unsuccessful legal defense (true story).

    What a schitz sees, hears and thinks is far more bizarre than the best posters here. They don't need any input from anyone to create some fantastic beliefs from the way the curtains are wrinkled.
    • Like Like x 2
  38. Rockyj Member

    It also brings up the issue of selling guns to the mentally ill.
    Also, what are automatic weapons used for?
  39. LRonAnon Member

    You think death by machete is any better?

    Killing things, that why the army has so many of them . A Glock9 is a semi-automatic weapon. (I'm not a Glock fanboi either)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins