Multiple Sources: Multiple shot including Congress Woman

[Madison Redskin]

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??

What kind of evidence would you like me to provide? Both parties engage in the rabble-rousing, fear-mongering BS. That said, just because both parties do it, I'm not about to say they're equally at fault for the current atmosphere. IMO, right-wing politicians (e.g., Palin) and political activists (e.g., tea-partiers) take the title, at least for now. My guess is that, once a member of the GOP takes up residence at the WH, the right will cede the title to the lefty loons.

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.

Oh, please share this evidence that the entire left is far more vitriolic than the entire right.

[Dan T.]

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.

Oh I look at it. I don't excuse it either. But to pretend there's equivalency in the level and amount is simply bogus.

BTW, not sure what "my side" is. I'm to the right of Daily Kos, to the left of Free Republic. I'm to the right of Keith Olbermann, to the left of Rush Limbaugh.

[JimboDaMan]

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.

Not really. The shooter was clearly irrational, but he wasn't completely isolated from the world around him. Do you really believe he was unaware of the political debates raging, the crosshairs on his "special interest", the previous attack on her offices? Whether or not he cited them is almost irrelevant, he couldn't have failed to notice them and must surely have derived some comfort believing there were others who might share his beliefs.

And if he did not...what does that prove? It could easily motivate the next guy with an internet connection, firearms, and worms eating at his brain. The language of hatred and implied violence should stop. Not because of censorship, just because its the right thing to do. This holds for people commenting on any side of the political spectrum.

I rarely watch TV news, so I'm not up on who did and didn't run with a Palin connection angle. I disagree with any newscaster who did so with no supporting evidence. But nobody should be pretending that to wonder about such a connection reveals a liberal bias. Look at Free Republic, some of the earliest posts immediately after the news broke showed a worry that the shooter could be traced to Palin or the Tea Party. I doubt these people are flaming liberals.

Maybe that's the way to go. Before you do or say something, stop and think. If something like this were to befall your opponent, would whatever you are doing cause you even a moment's worry that you somehow contributed to the tragedy?

[Hubbs]

Seriously, does nobody want to take a break from the sniping for a moment to figure out why the hell one of Giffords's two YouTube subscriptions was the shooter's channel? She clearly wasn't just subscribing to constituents' channels as a form of online glad-handing.

[Madison Redskin]

Oh I look at it. I don't excuse it either. But to pretend there's equivalency in the level and amount is simply bogus.

The lefties were far more vitriolic than the righties when Dubya was in office. The righties are far more vitriolic now that O is in office. That said, the lefty loons who were calling Bush Hitler probably represented 5% of the left, but a near majority of republicans think Obama is a Muslim foreigner.

[Tweedr01]

You're hoping she dies? Because last I heard, she was still alive. :doh:

What?! Come on, do you really think that's what I meant? I thought she had already died from reading the first page, is that incorrect?

[SnyderShrugged]

Seriously, does nobody want to take a break from the sniping for a moment to figure out why the hell one of Giffords's two YouTube subscriptions was the shooter's channel? She clearly wasn't just subscribing to constituents' channels as a form of online glad-handing.

That is a very strange fact for sure. Is it possible there was more contact between them than we have been led to believe or is it merely a coincidence.

[AsburySkinsFan]

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.

I agree 100%

[Tweedr01]

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 ----------

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

thanks guys, it is still my fault for not reading the entire thread I guess, oh well, misunderstandings and all

[Wrong Direction]

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....

Nice post. I honestly think your opinion above is slanted by your political beliefs, and I think that's natural and understandable.

This might not mean much to many of the left-leaning people on this board, but I remember when Clinton left office having the feeling that it would be good for our country to just move on from all of the rhetoric.

Then I remember during the Bush years...his initial election, a couple of 9/11 aftermath comments, Iraq, Katrina and his SS reform effort thinking that I've never seen anything like the hatred and vitriol that he's endured.

Now, the left feels the same way about the Tea Party and Obama in general.

This really is a head-in-the-sand moment, IMO. What you're seeing with political vitriol is not new or unique to one side. It's politics in the internet/24-hour news age, and it's not dissimilar to newspaper editorials at the time of our founding.

This isn't meant to excuse any of it, but I do think it's necessary to push back to those who really think this is either a) limited to one ideology or in any way new in politics.

Madison, I posted this earlier, but if you're looking for evidence of the left saying/doing similar things, read this article:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41087

[Madison Redskin]

Seriously, does nobody want to take a break from the sniping for a moment to figure out why the hell one of Giffords's two YouTube subscriptions was the shooter's channel? She clearly wasn't just subscribing to constituents' channels as a form of online glad-handing.

It's strange, but I'm sure there is a reasonable explanation for it. Thoughts?

[Dan T.]

Seriously, does nobody want to take a break from the sniping for a moment to figure out why the hell one of Giffords's two YouTube subscriptions was the shooter's channel? She clearly wasn't just subscribing to constituents' channels as a form of online glad-handing.

That is quite an oddity. I would like more information about when it was subscribedto and who subscribed to it - her, someone on her staff? The guy had contact with her and her office in the past. He may - as one of her constiuents - have asked her office to subscribe and they did as a courtesy.

I'll be watching for someone in the press to follow up on this weird angle.

[MonkFan8]

Seriously, does nobody want to take a break from the sniping for a moment to figure out why the hell one of Giffords's two YouTube subscriptions was the shooter's channel? She clearly wasn't just subscribing to constituents' channels as a form of online glad-handing.

They knew each other. He received a letter from Giffords after attending one of her rallies in 2007 (police discovered it in a safe in his house). More than likely he told her (or whoever operates her channel) that was his channel and she subscribed.

I'm sure that at the time she was just appreciative to have an avid supporter, not realizing this guy was disturbed.

[Tweedr01]

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.

dang, I'm sorry I don't sit at my house all day and watch news. I heard about it last week but I don't usually sit in front of a TV or computer (extremeskins) over the weekend, so any updates I would get Monday....which is today.

[Dan T.]

What?! Come on, do you really think that's what I meant? I thought she had already died from reading the first page, is that incorrect?

Sorry for my snarky reply.

She is still alive. She was shot through the left side of her head. She remains in critical condition, but the doctors are somewhat optimistic that she will survive. She showed responsiveness on the way to the hospital and in the ER - squeezing someone's hand in response to questions or commands.

[DjTj]

DJTJ...I really hope to one day hear Giffords thoughts on how this was covered

I imagine she would be fine with it. At the end of the day, she is a politician, and she just won an election by painting herself as the more moderate and reasonable candidate against an extremist tea party opponent. She is someone that reached across the aisle on many issues, and did not like any extremist rhetoric.

She also knew how to use major news events to further her own agenda, highlighting the death of a border agent to ask for more funding for her district: http://giffords.house.gov/2010/12/us-rep-gabrielle-giffords-statement-on-the-murder-of-border-patrol-agent.shtml

I don't know if she would agree with what is going on this thread, or everything that is being said on 24-hour news networks, but I think the politicians are actually handling the situation pretty well. Our elected officials are not doing any more fingerpointing, but they are trying to come together and avoid any inflammatory rhetoric or even any controversial business this week. They're not telling the news networks to not talk about the broader issues, but they're also not getting involved themselves. They're being politicians.

There’s been some effort to make sure the GOP has a level headed message — Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) team briefed freshman Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) before a high profile “Meet the Press” appearance Sunday.

Boehner also led a massive conference call of lawmakers, spouses and aides on Sunday, saying that the shooting should serve as an impetus for Congress to “lock arms” in unity. He also announced that Capitol Hill security leaders would provide a bipartisan security overview for lawmakers this week. It is “critical,” Boehner said on the call, that we “rally around wounded colleague, the families of the fallen, and the people of Arizona’s Eighth District. And, frankly, we need to rally around each other.”

Boehner’s work earned him Democratic praise — namely from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), according to those on the call.

“At a time when an individual has shown us humanity at its worst, we must rise to the occasion for our nation and show Congress at its best,” Boehner said on the call.

Boehner was the “highlight” of the call, a Democratic source who listened in said.

“He was very speakerly,” the source said.

Boehner, Cantor and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) are not doing any media interviews right now regarding the shooting.

The Republican leadership — namely Cantor — has also tried to set the tone for official Washington by delaying a key campaign promise: the repeal of President Barack Obama’s health care law. They were slated to do it this week, but have put it off and have not announced when they’d vote on it.

In fact, the House will not have any planned roll call votes this week, but leaders are urging members to return to D.C. for the dueling purpose of being there for a resolution that will honor victims of the attack and to receive security briefings.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47333.html#ixzz1Af1LSFo2

[Bang]

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.

No problem

So long as my side doesn't get the blame.

~Bang! Bang!Bang!Bang!

[Tweedr01]

Sorry for my snarky reply.

She is still alive. She was shot through the left side of her head. She remains in critical condition, but the doctors are somewhat optimistic that she will survive. She showed responsiveness on the way to the hospital and in the ER - squeezing someone's hand in response to questions or commands.

Thanks, no worries, like I said before, I shoulda read the thread. Good news though, great to hear.

[JimboDaMan]

They knew each other. He received a letter from Giffords after attending one of her rallies in 2007 (police discovered it in a safe in his house). More than likely he told her (or whoever operates her channel) that was his channel and she subscribed.

I'm sure that at the time she was just appreciative to have an avid supporter, not realizing this guy was disturbed.

Yeah, he seemed to think she inadequately answered a question he asked and began obsessing on her "stupidity".

I can't vouch for the authenticity, but I saw some tweets from a woman who was in a college class with him a few years ago. Guy was well over the edge even then. She talked about how disturbed he was, and how she chose a seat close to the door with one hand on her purse at all times, ready to flee. There are other reports about people who knew him and suspected it was him as soon as they heard the news.

[aREDSKIN]

Not really. The shooter was clearly irrational, but he wasn't completely isolated from the world around him. Do you really believe he was unaware of the political debates raging, the crosshairs on his "special interest", the previous attack on her offices? Whether or not he cited them is almost irrelevant, he couldn't have failed to notice them and must surely have derived some comfort believing there were others who might share his beliefs.

Given this guy's lunacy I'm unsure how you can make this assertion. The evidence, THUS FAR, points to a seriously deranged individual with a long history with this specific congresswomen. The interaction and or behaviors with this congresswoman seem to upset or not please him. There is NO evidence, THUS FAR, that any political discourse had any affect on his behavior. One can keep shouting from the roof tops that the political rhetoric was the cause but it doesn't make it so.

[jnhay]

I heard a hilarious segment on Laura Ingraham this morning where she defended herself and other political talk show hosts, basically saying they're not the problem (and I was actually agreeing with her), then she takes a 180 and blames the violent and sexually explicit shows on tv for ruining America's children. So hypocritical that it's almost unbelievable. You can't have it both ways!

[JimboDaMan]

Given this guy's lunacy I'm unsure how you can make this assertion. The evidence, THUS FAR, points to a seriously deranged individual with a long history with this specific congresswomen. The interaction and or behaviors with this congresswoman seem to upset or not please him. There is NO evidence, THUS FAR, that any political discourse had any affect on his behavior. One can keep shouting from the roof tops that the political rhetoric was the cause but it doesn't make it so.

The next post I make saying political rhetoric was the cause will be my first one. It would probably be the only one in this thread.

[Stadium-Armory]

Given this guy's lunacy I'm unsure how you can make this assertion. The evidence, THUS FAR, points to a seriously deranged individual with a long history with this specific congresswomen. The interaction and or behaviors with this congresswoman seem to upset or not please him. There is NO evidence, THUS FAR, that any political discourse had any affect on his behavior. One can keep shouting from the roof tops that the political rhetoric was the cause but it doesn't make it so.

Show me one post where someone says definitively that it is caused by political rhetoric. Since you want to only talk about black and white facts. (Well, you might be able to find one or two, but I think most are saying that its something that "might" be a contributing factor, and worth discussing).

[Wrong Direction]

So it could be Olbermann's fault? or Obama's? The left says mean things, creates hateful labels (I still have nightmares about neo-Conservatives and Bush killing Iraqi children) and blames the right for all that ailes us. You think it's less than the right? Maybe it's 60-40...so the left has a 40% chance of being responsible for this and the right a 60% chance?

See...going down this road with links to THIS crime just doesn't make sense, and it's because of the total lack of any evidence. If you want to "blame" anyone, isn't it on the Congresswoman who couldn't satisfy the crazy guy? I mean, at least she had a direct connection to him. The rest are just on twitter/radio/tv/whatever.

It just makes no sense to go down this road. Really, the left is mean. The right is mean. Many people who aren't mean have very passionnate political opinions. Ron Paul, who wants to return to the gold standard like this killer, comes to mind.

If I had to guess, it's Olbermann's fault. The guy was described as a liberal afterall. It MUST be on Olbermann.

Does that seem fair to anyone?

[Dan T.]

I blame Jared Lee Loughner.