Six dead, U.S. Congresswoman Giffords among at least 12 injured in Az. shooting

[cdnvic]

When your opening statement is so off the mark (full of shit)

....and you guys wonder why I crack the whip when it gets political. It's because you aren't grown up enough to have a reasonable discussion.

Kiss your posting rights goodbye.

[venturalaw]

The George Will analyzed the political rhetoric that followed the despicable act of a psychotic brilliantly. Here are the last few of paragraphs of his article published today:

"Last year, New York Times columnist Charles Blow explained that "the optics must be irritating" to conservatives: Barack Obama is black, Nancy Pelosi is female, Rep. Barney Frank is gay, Rep. Anthony Weiner (an unimportant Democrat, listed to serve Blow's purposes) is Jewish. "It's enough," Blow said, "to make a good old boy go crazy." The Times, which after the Tucson shooting said that "many on the right" are guilty of "demonizing" people and of exploiting "arguments of division," apparently was comfortable with Blow's insinuation that conservatives are misogynistic, homophobic, racist anti-Semites.

On Sunday, the Times explained Tucson: "It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman's act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But . . ." The "directly" is priceless.

Three days before Tucson, Howard Dean explained that the Tea Party movement is "the last gasp of the generation that has trouble with diversity." Rising to the challenge of lowering his reputation and the tone of public discourse, Dean smeared Tea Partyers as racists: They oppose Obama's agenda, Obama is African American, ergo . . .

Let us hope that Dean is the last gasp of the generation of liberals whose default position in any argument is to indict opponents as racists. This McCarthyism of the left - devoid of intellectual content, unsupported by data - is a mental tic, not an idea but a tactic for avoiding engagement with ideas. It expresses limitless contempt for the American people, who have reciprocated by reducing liberalism to its current characteristics of electoral weakness and bad sociology."

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will011111.php3

Edited January 11, 2011 by venturalaw

[Jingthing]

George Will is a very intelligent intellectual conservative writer. He is nothing like Limbaugh, Palin, and company in that regard who appeal to base emotions and often betray an anti-intellectual bias. If political discussion on the left and right in the US was as civil as that evidenced by George Will, there wouldn't be any issue with the abrasive tone of US political discourse.

Bill Maher is also a very intelligent leftist commentator and comedian. So in response to Will's item about the left's accusation of racism from the right, with a direct link to the controversy in Arizona over their renegade immigration law --

Not all Republicans are racists, but racists are more than likely to be Republican

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/05/maher-racists-republicans/

I would add all right wingers to that, as not all right wingers are republicans; and I would also add homophobia (anti-gay-rights at least) to that.

Anti-semitism in the US? No, not the same thing, such that exists is much more evenly distributed across the political spectrum.

As far as the shooter, in his ramblings, there is some evidence of racially motivated xenophobia (in his preoccupation with not enough people in his area speaking English and realistically most of those people are Mexicans), and anyone who specifically targets an elected Jewish politician certainly would be suspected of anti-semitism by many, though that alone is not proof. There was a mention that he was upset at an earlier date that the congresswoman replied to a question in Spanish. I understand people's current conclusion that this is all about the insanity of the shooter, but interestingly, his chances of getting pardoned based on an insanity defense (if that turns out to be his strategy) are practically zero in Arizona. A bit of irony there, Arizona, a super easy state for an insane man to get a gun legally but a super strict state to use the insanity defense.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jingthing

[TAWP]

"Father Of 9 Year Old Murder Victim In Tucson Does Not Want Restrictions Of Freedoms!"

[Jingthing]

I don't think anyone wants to see government officials have to hide behind security barriers to talk to their constituents. I doubt that would happen unless these kinds of attacks become a pattern. However, how can anyone justify a legal system such as in Arizona where someone who showed so many warning signs of mental illness was able to legally buy such lethal weapons? I would personally be against restricting abrasive political speech as well, even though it sure would be nice if there was more unity and cooperation.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

There was a mention that he was upset at an earlier date that the congresswoman replied to a question in Spanish. I understand people's current conclusion that this is all about the insanity of the shooter, but interestingly, his chances of getting pardoned based on an insanity defense (if that turns out to be his strategy) are practically zero in Arizona.

She replied to his question in 2007 - which - surprise, surprise - did not make any sense and he has a carried a grudge ever since.

By the way, 2007 was something like two years before the advent of the Tea Party and when Glenn Beck first started appearing on Fox News.

Most likely, he will not be able to win with an insanity defense, because he left too much evidence that he had planned to assassinate her and that he knew that what he was doing was morally wrong. Therefore, he does not meet the legal definition of insanity necessary to be excused for killing someone

[Jingthing]

There was a mention that he was upset at an earlier date that the congresswoman replied to a question in Spanish. I understand people's current conclusion that this is all about the insanity of the shooter, but interestingly, his chances of getting pardoned based on an insanity defense (if that turns out to be his strategy) are practically zero in Arizona.

She replied to his question in 2007 - which - surprise, surprise - did not make any sense and he has a carried a grudge ever since.

By the way, 2007 was something like two years before the advent of the Tea Party and when Glenn Beck first started appearing on Fox News.

Most likely, he will not be able to win with an insanity defense, because he left too much evidence that he had planned to assassinate her and that he knew that what he was doing was morally wrong. Therefore, he does not meet the legal definition of insanity necessary to be excused for killing someone

The tea party didn't get created out of thin air. The constituency for that kind of movement obviously already existed. The tea party isn't the shooter and the shooter isn't the tea party, but this politically charged incident did occur in a local political context where the tea party does have current relevance.

I personally have no sympathy for the shooter, insane or not, so maybe I am not as liberal as I sound. Although I oppose the death penalty, there are certain cases like this which challenge my beliefs on that. It's pretty easy to predict he will be executed, the main question being how long that takes to happen.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Several of the shooter's acquaintances have described him as a "pot smoking left-winger", but certain parties seem to be doing their best to completely ignore that.

[Jingthing]

Several of the shooter's acquaintances have described him as a "pot smoking left-winger", but certain parties seem to be doing their best to completely ignore that.

Whatever his politics, if indeed he had any coherent politics, he did indeed commit an act of terrorism against an official who in the context of that particular very right wing district was perceived as a left wing target. I think there is a fair chance more will come out later about his interesting mental workings, or then again, maybe not.

For the record, not all pot smokers are left wingers.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jingthing

[venturalaw]

Several of the shooter's acquaintances have described him as a "pot smoking left-winger", but certain parties seem to be doing their best to completely ignore that.

Whatever his politics, if he indeed he had any coherent politics, he did indeed commit an act of terrorism. I think there is a fair chance more will come out later about his interesting mental workings, or then again, maybe not.

What is most troubling is the apparent zeal that the likes of Paul Krugman, MSNBC's Olbermann, Senator Dick Durbin, etc. blamed Republicans for the acts of a psychotic. However, as it turns out, this perpetrator was a registered independent who chose not to vote in the last election. Would the left be blaming Muslims if the shooter was a young man from Yemen? Of course not. Hypocrisy on steroids.

Edited January 11, 2011 by venturalaw

[Jingthing]

Please, get real. A huge portion of the American right wing are not registered republicans. Many are independents, other funny parties, not registered, and/or don't vote. Many people have very strong political feelings but feel no motivation to vote.

[Ulysses G.]

For the record, not all pot smokers are left wingers.

I agree, but if one of their favorite books is the Communist Manifesto and everyone who knows them describes them as a lefty, it probably means that they are not exactly conservative.

[Jingthing]

For the record, not all pot smokers are left wingers.

I agree, but if one of their favorite books is the Communist Manifesto and everyone who knows them describes them as a lefty, it probably means that they are not exactly conservative.

Interesting game of exclusion you just played there. You fail to mention his entire book list which includes a famous NAZI tract. People interested in politics typically read a range, as I assume you do know. You can't tell his politics from that book list although you can tell that he didn't care very much what people thought about him.

At this point I think the media is correct to say that his politics are incoherent. There is a definite anti-government theme to a lot of it though.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

What do you not understand about people who actually know him describe him as left-wing?

Now, all of a sudden you want to finally admit that he is a psycho with NO political agenda (anti-government is not exclusive to left or right).

Edited January 11, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

What do you not understand about people who actually know him describe him as left-wing?

Objectively, maybe those people were Nazis, so it would then be relative, yes, also considering he comes from a very right wing area? I think his public statements that can be analyzed objectively are better evidence. Another thing I would suspect of such people is perhaps they are right wingers and know that painting him as a left winger would be a kind of mud throwing on the left wing. Remember, we are talking about a very politically polarized area (border Arizona) in a polarized country in the midst of the worst economic situation since the depression.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jingthing

[neverdie]

To bring some perspective to this discussion:

http://www.npr.org/b...-citizens?ps=rs

Of all the tragedies, the death of 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green seemed to cut the deepest, as children's deaths invariably do.

The grade-schooler was recently elected president of the student council at the Mesa Verde Elementary School.

According to someone who knew her, she wanted to be a veterinarian. But she was outside the Safeway supermarket at Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' "Congress on Your Corner" event because she was also interested in politics.

Her grief-stricken father, John Green, a scout for the Los Angeles Dodgers, told an interviewer through a voice that broke at times:

She was born on 9/11. So she came in on a tragedy and she went out on a tragedy. Those nine years in between were very special. We're all going to miss Christina. We were four people. Now we're three. All I can say is we're going to be strong for each other. And we're going to honor Christina because she was a beautiful strong little girl. And we're going to remember all the good things about her.

She was the granddaughter of Dallas Green, the former Phillies pitcher and manager.

That is very sad sbk.

[Ulysses G.]

One guy that knew the shooter well and was interviewed on TV had really strange, florescent, cheery-red hair. I don't think that he was a Nazi.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

One guy that was interviewed on TV had really strange, florescent, cheery-red hair. i don't think that he was a Nazi.

You seem to want to simplify this. Personally, I have yet to meet a left winger who believes in bringing back the gold standard (one of the clearly stated very right wing positions from the shooter's youtubes).

[venturalaw]

Please, get real. A huge portion of the American right wing are not registered republicans. Many are independents, other funny parties, not registered, and/or don't vote. Many people have very strong political feelings but feel no motivation to vote.

A 'huge portion' of the American right wing do not profess that the Communist Manifesto is one of their favorite books and, unlike the subliminal message liberals attribute to Palin's map, Marx and Engles explicitly advocated political violence.

Edited January 11, 2011 by venturalaw

[Jingthing]

Please, get real. A huge portion of the American right wing are not registered republicans. Many are independents, other funny parties, not registered, and/or don't vote. Many people have very strong political feelings but feel no motivation to vote.

A 'huge portion' of the American right wing do not profess that the Communist Manifesto as one of their favorite books and, unlike the subliminal message liberals attribute to Palin's map, Marx and Engles explicitly advocated political violence.

His list included Mein Kampf. He liked to read political books. That's all that says about him. I reckon he also liked to "freak people out" and listing books like that did that, but I guess he did his climax freak out at the shopping mall. It is clear there will be psychological reports done on this terrorist's mind, so the truth is, we don't really know all that much about him as yet.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Personally, I have yet to meet a left winger who believes in bringing back the gold standard (one of the clearly stated very right wing positions from the shooter's youtubes).

I have not seen any of his videos where he clearly stated ANYTHING. You are really stretching as he does not mention the "gold standard" anywhere that I have seen - just some gobbledygook about "new currency". See what he actually has to say here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10#p/a/u/0/7uRjwPWaxiY

Edited January 11, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[venturalaw]

Please, get real. A huge portion of the American right wing are not registered republicans. Many are independents, other funny parties, not registered, and/or don't vote. Many people have very strong political feelings but feel no motivation to vote.

A 'huge portion' of the American right wing do not profess that the Communist Manifesto as one of their favorite books and, unlike the subliminal message liberals attribute to Palin's map, Marx and Engles explicitly advocated political violence.

His list included Mein Kampf. He liked to read political books. That's all that says about him.

Yes, so please, if you are able, explain why Paul Krugman, MSNBC's Olbermann, and Senator Dick Durbin, immediately embraced the concept that the Republicans were responsible for the acts of this psychotic?

[Ulysses G.]

Not to mention several posters on Thai Visa.

[TAWP]

Jingthing>> Is it your position that unless someone can 100% prove that the guy wasn't in any way connected, even be it via a distant relative, to the Tea Party movement, then it is their fault, they are to blame and that is that?

You have a very odd concept on how proving things should go about. You don't start with a premises and then try to find evidence to prove it. You gather all evidence and then draw the logical conclusion from all findings.

[chuckd]

Several of the shooter's acquaintances have described him as a "pot smoking left-winger", but certain parties seem to be doing their best to completely ignore that.

Whatever his politics, if he indeed he had any coherent politics, he did indeed commit an act of terrorism. I think there is a fair chance more will come out later about his interesting mental workings, or then again, maybe not.

What is most troubling is the apparent zeal that the likes of Paul Krugman, MSNBC's Olbermann, Senator Dick Durbin, etc. blamed Republicans for the acts of a psychotic. However, as it turns out, this perpetrator was a registered independent who chose not to vote in the last election. Would the left be blaming Muslims if the shooter was a young man from Yemen? Of course not. Hypocrisy on steroids.

Most of the liberal left haven't come to grips with the simple fact that Major Nidal Malik Hassan was a Muslim even as he yelled "Allah Akbar" while gunning down 13 soldiers at Fort Hood. These murders happened in November 2009 and we still await his psychological competency evaluation.

My bet is it won't take that long to get the Tucson shooter declared competent to stand trial, but then he shot a politician, not simple soldiers.

[geriatrickid]

One guy that knew the shooter well and was interviewed on TV had really strange, florescent, cheery-red hair. I don't think that he was a Nazi.

Dear Uncle, Dr. Pornthip has a special hairdo going on with some wild colouring too. I don't think she's a lefty. She is after all closely linked to the the hai military with her embarrassment on the bomb detectors. Years ago, people with long hair tattoos and weird piercings were deemed to be "radicals". Today these people are very much part of the mainstream. I do not think physical appearances say too much. Some of the most outspoken liberals have the dullest wardrobes going on, while many of the conservatives have heavily gelled hair and use lots of cosmetics. I just hope you are not sitting at your keyboard in a wild print moo moo.

[Ulysses G.]

Maybe he was really Glenn Beck with a really weird red wig.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[chuckd]

Do you wonder who said this?

"If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun"

Find the answer here: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/14/obama-if-they-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-we-bring-a-gun/

[geriatrickid]

I wish to emphasize that one aspect of this tragedy is that the people killed were basically conservative. The federal judge was appointed by President Bush the elder. The older gent that helped subdue the gunman was a retired army colonel. The physician and his nurse wife that acted to render assistance can hardly be considered granola munching hippies etc. The people at the meeting for the most part were the backbone of society; The workers, the people that build and sustain a community.

Out of this tragedy, there is also reassurance; The bravery of the Congresswoman's young staffers that stayed with her and that didn't run away, the 78 year old pastor that died shielding his wife. There are still people with decency and values around.

Yes there are political recriminations and lots of finger pointing. That's a good thing if only to cause people to pause and give sober thought to the impact of nasty words. We're all guilty of it at times. I'm sure I've caused Ulysees to moan and dislike some of my opinions expressed in the thread. I'd also like to think that he's not about to start spewing venom over a disagreement. Maybem he'd want to give me a slap or something, but nothing too serious. And therein lies one of the main issues: The inability of people today to express themselves and their views without resorting to threats and violence. It is as if our society has regressed back to the schoolyard stage where kids punch each other over a ball. We see it in Thailand now on a daily basis when disputes escalate into violent confrontations. Years ago, no one would have beat up a defenseless girl selling fruit on a beach, but here on the pages of TVF we read about it in sad detail.

I wonder if this slide into angry exchanges is a result of the dumbing down of our society. Ok, I sound like one of those old squares, but I remember how years ago in school I was exposed to books and alternative viewpoints. Today, in our busy society we get our information from sound bites and youtube and urls where information is easily biased or distorted. Gone is the ability for critical thinking. We've gone back to the black and white era of the 1950's where commies were a threat, where faciasts were still active, where you were a hepcat or a square. The 60's brought so many new ideas and the time to read and think. Now with the economic crisis, people seek simplicity. Maybe they are overwhelmed and want an easy way out. Whatever the reasons, every time society becomes so visibly polarized, it ends in civil unrest and war. One need only look at the sadness that was last April in Bangkok or the current political clashes in the UK and the USA.

[Scott]

Thank you for a thoughtful post, Geriatrickid.

Hopefully posters will remember that a very basic right is the right to disagree with others.