DjTj Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Then we agree! It shouldnt even be a part of this thread. It infers culpability where there never was anyCulpability aside, there is still the fact that Giffords herself spoke out on this precise issue. Xo6pNDH2Hqk So there is a connection here, and it shouldn't be a surprise that the media has reported heavily on this angle. The last time Giffords was really in the news, it was because someone shattered the window of her office after the health care vote, and she specifically called out Palin's website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I said the shooter was 100% responsible for the murders. I also said that Palin was partly responsible for creating the hostile atmosphere. See the difference? Reading is hard.Sure you want more civility. You just want people to be civil after you tell them they look like fools and are idiots. Please provide substantiation for the second part of your assertion. Why do you conveniently leave out all the left's hateful rhetoric, as provided in this thread, or is it just your perception of the rights' that's important for you?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 DJTJ...I really hope to one day hear Giffords thoughts on how this was covered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Please provide substantiation for the second part of your assertion. Why do you conveniently leave out all the left's hateful rhetoric, as provided in this thread, or is it just your perception of the rights' that's important for you?? He won't it isn't his style, he wears left colored blinders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I think DJTJ connected the dots pretty well. Palin made Gifford a "target" for her stance on health care >> Giffords' office was the target of vandals after the health care vote >> Giffords was interviewed after the incident and talked about the Palin angle >> Giffords was the victim of an assassination attempt by an anti government psychotic. How is it not fair to talk about the link between these events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Then we agree! It shouldnt even be a part of this thread. It infers culpability where there never was any Sure. But I'll add this: whether this act of violence occurred or not, what Palin did was disgusting, and she was at fault for putting that type of crap out there even if no shooting ever occurred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedr01 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This is terrible, I didn't read through the entire thread, but I hope she RIP. On a sidenote, there was a thread made awhile ago (I believe in the past couple months) where a lady tried to approach a politician to give him some sarcastic award and was brought to the ground and unnecessarily kicked in the head I believe. I still think that once she was brought down that the extra violence was unnecessary, however because of crazies like this guy who killed several people, I believe they did the right thing in taking her to the ground. You never know what the crazies out there will do. Hopefully I'm not the only one who remembers that thread, I immediately thought of it when I read this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I think DJTJ connected the dots pretty well.Palin made Gifford a "target" for her stance on health care >> Giffords' office was the target of vandals after the health care vote >> Giffords was interviewed after the incident and talked about the Palin angle >> Giffords was the victim of an assassination attempt by an anti government psychotic. How is it not fair to talk about the link between these events? because there is nothing to connect them? Please stop the nonsense. ---------- Post added January-10th-2011 at 01:11 PM ---------- Sure. But I'll add this: whether this act of violence occurred or not, what Palin did was disgusting, and she was at fault for putting that type of crap out there even if no shooting ever occurred. I dislike Palin for many things, but if we want to censor every dumb statement and thing a politician does, we would be awful busy. again, the entire discussion of palin, politics, etc doen not belong in this thread. They are not related whatsoever and to do so is a veiled attempt at blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 because there is nothing to connect them? Please stop the nonsense. I disagree, you don't know that there is nothing to connect them, just as I don't know 100% for sure that there is -- and therefore we discuss. That's what we do here. I find it more nonsensical to say that there is no possible way that there is a connection of any sort, and furthermore, it should not even be discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I dislike Palin for many things, but if we want to censor every dumb statement and thing a politician does, we would be awful busy. again, the entire discussion of palin, politics, etc doen not belong in this thread. They are not related whatsoever and to do so is a veiled attempt at blame. I didnt say censor. I said she should be held responsible for her remarks. The comments and charts are offensive and disgusting, which is not the same as censorable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I disagree, you don't know that there is nothing to connect them, just as I don't know 100% for sure that there is -- and therefore we discuss. That's what we do here. do what you think is best, but it comes off as finger pointing and petty based on the facts known at this point. What have you seen in the shooters words. videos, and statements from his friends and other people who knew him, that indicate any connection to Palin whatsoever? (for the record, I am pretty against Palin too, but mentioning her in this thread is just beyond the pale to me) ---------- Post added January-10th-2011 at 01:19 PM ---------- I didnt say censor. I said she should be held responsible for her remarks. The comments and charts are offensive and disgusting, which is not the same as censorable. Then you should mount a campaign to clean up all politics. Sounds like a nice thread idea, you should start one if you are feeling that strongly about it. That still has no bearing on this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brave Little Toaster Oven Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 :doh: this thread keeps getting worse...the stupid trying to connect the dots that arent there are ****ing stupid and reeks of partisanship... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 How is it not fair to talk about the link between these events? Because the facts we have do not support a linkage? I could understand some speculation early,but not the tsunami we have seen...it appears Giffords little blurb is the only thing she spoke of to some people....ya'll should check her out in full. Sorry,but to my eyes it is a witch hunt and blood libel to continue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Please provide substantiation for the second part of your assertion. Why do you conveniently leave out all the left's hateful rhetoric, as provided in this thread, or is it just your perception of the rights' that's important for you?? Sorry, the logic that both sides are equally culpable in the rhetoric flame wars won't fly, as much as you wish it to be so. The use of weapons imagery, the country-on-the-brink-of-collapse language, the hints at the need for rebellion, Beck's almost daily armageddon-like rants... that comes heavily from one side of the political spectrum. And that's true if you lop off the crap coming from both the right and left fringes. To try to create a moral equivalency with the occasional metaphor from the other side just won't fly. I say this separate from the violence in Tucson, and speak only of the political climate today. The rhetoric that has come with the rise of the Tea Party movement, from Sarah Palin's "don't retreat, RELOAD" language and use of rifle sights to target opponents, and from commentators like Glenn Beck get the lion's share of the blame for the vitriolic tone of political discourse today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 :doh: this thread keeps getting worse...the stupid trying to connect the dots that arent there are ****ing stupid and reeks of partisanship... Calling people stupid doesn't help to make a sensible case, in fact quite the opposite. Also, if railing against hatred is partisan, I'm happy to be branded as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This is terrible, I didn't read through the entire thread, but I hope she RIP. You're hoping she dies? Because last I heard, she was still alive. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Um... okay, so this is really, really weird. This is Giffords' YouTube channel. As you can see from the number of uploads, as well as their dates, she (or at least a member of her staff) was relatively active on the site, and had 331 subscribers. If you scroll down, at the bottom-left corner of the page you'll see that she had only subscribed to two channels herself. One is operated by another Rep. The other is Jared Lee Loughner's channel. :paranoid: ---------- Post added January-10th-2011 at 01:25 PM ---------- You're hoping she dies? Because last I heard, she was still alive. :doh: Yes. Yes, of course, that must be what he meant. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I disagree, you don't know that there is nothing to connect them, just as I don't know 100% for sure that there is -- and therefore we discuss. That's what we do here. I find it more nonsensical to say that there is no possible way that there is a connection of any sort, and furthermore, it should not even be discussed. If one reads the thread with a true sense of objectivity then your position is not supported by any fact. In fact just the opposite could be offered as more closer to the truth than what you conjecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 You're hoping she dies? Because last I heard, she was still alive. :doh: sheesh, its obvious he didnt realize she hadnt passed away and was saying rest in peace. give the guy a break Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 If one reads the thread with a true sense of objectivity then your position is not supported by any fact. In fact just the opposite could be offered as more closer to the truth than what you conjecture. That's true. I don't by any means think that "Palin made me do it" is what's going on here. What I do think is that the anti government, anti establishment, anti gay, anti everything rhetoric has (and will continue) to come back to roost. Words matter, especially to the impressionable, and we should not be surprised to see this sort of thing happen in a climate that is charged with bulls eyes and cross hairs. On either side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I have no idea what motivated this loony. I will not claim that he was motivated by anything more than his own demons unless I get a lot more information. I still think there is something seriously wrong with the hyperventilating rhetoric coming from the right these days, particularly from the Tea Party factions and the conservative media echo chamber.... but maybe this isn't the best time to talk about it - because it will be interpreted as trying to place direct blame on them for this incident, which I don't think is fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I have no idea what motivated this loony. I will not claim that he was motivated by anything more than his own demons unless I get a lot more information.I still think there is something seriously wrong with the hyperventilating rhetoric coming from the right these days, particularly from the Tea Party factions and the conservative media echo chamber.... but maybe this isn't the best time to talk about it - because it will be interpreted as trying to place direct blame on them for this incident, which I don't think is fair. Thank you for the adding a voice to the sane perspective! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I have no idea what motivated this loony. I will not claim that he was motivated by anything more than his own demons unless I get a lot more information.I still think there is something seriously wrong with the hyperventilating rhetoric coming from the right these days, particularly from the Tea Party factions and the conservative media echo chamber.... but maybe this isn't the best time to talk about it - because it will be interpreted as trying to place direct blame on them for this incident, which I don't think is fair. ^A reasonable man. Thank you. The whole politics/blame thing is getting way out of hand with respect to this incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yes. Yes, of course, that must be what he meant. :doh: sheesh, its obvious he didnt realize she hadnt passed away and was saying rest in peace.give the guy a break You're right. I was just taken aback by how uninformed he apparently is about this. It's not like this is some minor story buried on the back pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Sorry, the logic that both sides are equally culpable in the rhetoric flame wars won't fly, as much as you wish it to be so. The use of weapons imagery, the country-on-the-brink-of-collapse language, the hints at the need for rebellion, Beck's almost daily armageddon-like rants... that comes heavily from one side of the political spectrum. And that's true if you lop off the crap coming from both the right and left fringes. To try to create a moral equivalency with the occasional metaphor from the other side just won't fly. I say this separate from the violence in Tucson, and speak only of the political climate today. The rhetoric that has come with the rise of the Tea Party movement, from Sarah Palin's "don't retreat, RELOAD" language and use of rifle sights to target opponents, and from commentators like Glenn Beck get the lion's share of the blame for the vitriolic tone of political discourse today. And your refusal to look at, even excuse, your sides hateful discourse is pretty telling. There is ample evidence that the "entire left" is far more vitriolic than the "entire right" There are of course individual exceptions. There is no evidence that ANY political discourse has triggered this incidence no matter how much you wish it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.