Burgold Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Why would you say that? There wasnt much in terms of politics in his wierd youtube, In fact, he was focused on literacy more than anything for some strange reason,He is simply someone with a very severe mental disorder. It feels reasonable. After years of non-stop hate and calls to action. It's not hard to believe that someone who was close to the edge could be pushed over. I think if you are constantly besieged by "take back our country" "the enemy within" "socialist" "anti-American" and even calls to revolution... someone prone to instability could feel compelled to act. Whether or not this was directly spurred by the hate language of modern politics or not it certainly wouldn't hurt us if we learned to be more civil and realize that even though we disagree and even if we disagree vehemently that we are not enemies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brave Little Toaster Oven Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 @antderosa As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal. & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy. 33 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone in reply to antderosa @antderosa he was a pot head & into rock like Hendrix,The Doors, Anti-Flag. I haven't seen him in person since '07 in a sign language class 35 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone in reply to antderosa @antderosa He was a political radical & met Giffords once before in '07, asked her a question & he told me she was "stupid & unintelligent" ---------- from that Twitter account posted previously... everyone needs to STFU about trying to connect this to Palin...the guy is a liberal and this all doesnt make sense - he's not connected to any party and is a complete psycho. I personally dont care about Palin at all and think she is dumb as dirt, but all this talk is ****ing annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Maybe Palin took the example of the Daily Kos for her ad, it talks about targeting Blue Dog Dems, stupidity any way you cut it:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/74882/511/541568 ---------- Post added January-8th-2011 at 05:22 PM ---------- Nope all this because of a nut job with a yet to be determined agenda. Bull ****.This guy's a nut and it's wrong to say "Palin encouraged this". She's irresponsible, but not complicit. But I knew right wingers would defensively search for examples where Democrats used the word "target" and try to equate that to Palin's crosshairs. Bull crap. That's a dishonest equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 It feels reasonable. After years of non-stop hate and calls to action. It's not hard to believe that someone who was close to the edge could be pushed over. I think if you are constantly besieged by "take back our country" "the enemy within" "socialist" "anti-American" and even calls to revolution... someone prone to instability could feel compelled to act.Whether or not this was directly spurred by the hate language of modern politics or not it certainly wouldn't hurt us if we learned to be more civil and realize that even though we disagree and even if we disagree vehemently that we are not enemies. It wouldnt hurt for everyone to be nice, thats for sure. But its still a fairly significant reach to apply any political lable to this guy. His own words have him all over the spectrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homercles82 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Left wingers are stumbling over their spittle to try and link Palin to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I have a buck that says he never read either of them.I think maybe he'd like to have, but most likely was seeking attention. ~Bang Gee, you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 It wouldnt hurt for everyone to be nice, thats for sure. But its still a fairly significant reach to apply any political lable to this guy. His own words have him all over the spectrum. It looks that way. I'm learning more as this is breaking. He could be apolitical nut and I could be totally off base. I do think the rhetoric and verbal invitations to action are inciting and often irresponsible. Mind you, this shooting is not the fault of Palin or political shock jocks or incendiary politicians. However, I think that the violence in our language be compelling and I urge people to be conscious of what they say and how they say it and think we a greater degree of responsibility couldn't hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 What a tragedy. Thoughts out to everyone touched by this incident. Clearly the guy is unstable, I'd like to know why he did what he did. I think it's a bit of a stretch to paint Palin into the picture at this time. By no means am I defending Palin, I think she is exactly what is wrong with this country, but I don't think you should automatically jump tot he conclusion that her campaign influenced the shooter. It could have been the guy just being a nut job who didn't like her. Hell, if people are jumping to blame Palin, it's possible that the Dem powers at be paid the guy to do it to make Palin and the Reps look bad. Anything is possible, which is why I'd like to find out more before passing some judgment. Right now, my thoughts are mainly on those involved and their safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Why would you say that? There wasnt much in terms of politics in his wierd youtube, In fact, he was focused on literacy more than anything for some strange reason,He is simply someone with a very severe mental disorder. Yeah, he does have a strange fascination with literacy. As I posted earlier, It appears he volunteered for the Tucson Book Festival. http://azstarnet.com/events/collection_aebeb63c-2f9e-11df-9021-001cc4c002e0.html?mode=image&photo=8 for whatever that's worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tris Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Whats sad is how eager both sides are to pin him as one of the "other side" in hopes of political gain. "See, THEY'RE the problem." Disgusting on all sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 It looks that way. I'm learning more as this is breaking. He could be apolitical nut and I could be totally off base. I do think the rhetoric and verbal invitations to action are inciting and often irresponsible. Mind you, this shooting is not the fault of Palin or political shock jocks or incendiary politicians. However, I think that the violence in our language be compelling and I urge people to be conscious of what they say and how they say it and think we a greater degree of responsibility couldn't hurt. Let me simplify. You can't say "they are taking our freedom and destroying out country" over and over again and not expect a lunatic to take you seriously. Those are strong words... words worthy of literally going to war over is said about an enemy threat. It's irresponsible and while it may not have caused this attack it sure as hell did inspire a loon to target the Tides foundation and get into a shoot out with police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Bull ****.This guy's a nut and it's wrong to say "Palin encouraged this". She's irresponsible, but not complicit. But I knew right wingers would defensively search for examples where Democrats used the word "target" and try to equate that to Palin's crosshairs. Bull crap. That's a dishonest equation. So from you post I guess you think I'm a "Right Winger"? You don't know anything about me so don't act like you do, I think I called Palin's ad stupid, so you can think what you like I really don't give a **** about what you think. But I believe when I shoot something I put a crosshair on a target. Whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Sad day for the families and friends of these people. Also, I don't think we know his motives just yet, but history has shown that extremist rhetoric breeds extremist action. Whether that was the case here is yet to be seen though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bibby Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 They had a man in custody just after the shooting with a description, your post came an hour later so what is that suppose to mean? I posted while listening to Fox News and they never made a description at that time. It doesn't really matter anymore. I hope she recovers to the fullest. She seems like a really great person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Let me simplify. You can't say "they are taking our freedom and destroying out country" over and over again and not expect a lunatic to take you seriously. Those are strong words... words worthy of literally going to war over is said about an enemy threat. It's irresponsible and while it may not have caused this attack it sure as hell did inspire a loon to target the Tides foundation and get into a shoot out with police. Thanks Des. In trying to be careful I may have been a bit arcane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Whats sad is how eager both sides are to pin him as one of the "other side" in hopes of political gain. "See, THEY'RE the problem." Disgusting on all sides. Irresponsible speech is a problem no matter who does it. I don't know if this is political at all but what I've said is that if it is, this is gong to get really ugly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Every event is a fresh opportunity to advance our personal political ideology. Yay America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 anyone that has seen this guys youtube videos knows he's clearly deranged. His political persuasion is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Political or not, Palin is going to get flak for this: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e20147e162af25970b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 One of Andrew Sullivan's readers wrote him with this: I'm a licensed psychologist with 20 years experience. I've watched the Jared Loughner Youtube videos. They show evidence of delusions of persecution. Loughner's less than coherent language also suggests a formal thought disorder. While Loughner can't be diagnosed without a full exam conducted in person, there are significant indications in the videos that he suffers from a psychotic disorder. I would not rule out drugs as a factor, but he is within the age range that psychotic patients often suffer their first psychotic break. If I had to guess, I'd go with paranoid schizophrenia. If that's the case, his politics are irrelevant. He may not even be fit to stand trial unless and until his psychotic thinking is brought under control with medication. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...-blogging.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Irresponsible speech is a problem no matter who does it. I don't know if this is political at all but what I've said is that if it is, this is gong to get really ugly. Let me ask you serious question, how would you stop "Irresponsible speech" without violating the constitution? And who decides what "Irresponsible speech" is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Let me ask you serious question, how would you stop "Irresponsible speech" without violating the constitution? And who decides what "Irresponsible speech" is? You don't stop it. You just call it out as irresponsible when you see it, and you don't support people who do it. Its a judgement call. History can also help to guide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 You don't stop it. You just call it out as irresponsible when you see it, and you don't support people who do it. Ah, but what you find irresponsible some folks may find reasonable. Not arguing just playing devils advocate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Let me ask you serious question, how would you stop "Irresponsible speech" without violating the constitution? And who decides what "Irresponsible speech" is? All of us have the ability to self-censor and most of us do this every day. The choice to be responsible does not need to come from the outside from some governmental edict. It starts with you and what you choose to say and how you choose to say it. When a politician prepares a speech, when a political analyst sits at a round table, when a radio or tv guy sits behind the mic they are in control of their tongue. More, a director, editor, speech writer and others can be the voice of reason and help put the brakes on. There's a reason I don't go walking down the street taking a swing at everyone who annoys me or shouting curse words in a church or in a day care center. You act like professionals can't exercise self-restraint and aren't conscious of what they say. At least 75% of the time they are very conscious of their words and in a speech I'd up that to 90% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Ah, but what you find irresponsible some folks may find reasonable. Not arguing just playing devils advocate Yup, its a judgement call. As an extreme example, we can look back at Hitler's rhetoric and see what it did to the German people. I'm not equating any of Palin's remarks to Hitler, in fact, as I said in an earlier post, I think the jury is still out on this one and we shouldn't jump to any conclusions. But to say that "words" don't incite is naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.