Taking advantage of tragedy

..."At a news conference Saturday evening, Sheriff Dupnik said there was "some reason to believe" that the suspect in custody did not act alone. Officials said they were seeking a second suspect: a 50-year-old, white male.

The sheriff said the suspected shooter “has kind of a troubled past” and had come to the attention of law enforcement before.

Though most officials did not speculate about what might have provoked the attack, Sheriff Dupnik offered an emotional indictment of the state of political discourse.

“The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And unfortunately, I think Arizona has become sort of the capital, we have beome the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry,” he said. “There’s reason to believe that this individual might have a mental issue, and I think that people who are unbalanced might be especially susceptible to vitriol.”

Ms. Giffords, who represents Arizona’s Eighth District in the southeastern corner of the state, has been an outspoken critic of Arizona’s tough immigration law, which is focused on identifying, prosecuting and deporting illegal immigrants, and she had come under criticism for her vote in favor of the Democrats’ health care law.

Law enforcement officials said she had received threats over the years..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/us/politics/09bai.html

But there's no reason to suspect a political motivation, is there?
 
Yes, there is hatred on both sides, but there is hardly an equivalence of violent rhetoric on the left and right. You've got to be kidding me with this nonsense.

Are you kidding me?

Maybe you have forgotten all the "Kill Bush", or "I hope Cheney has a heart attack" or the online posting of names and addresses of Bush supporters and those people's houses being egged or them being harrassed?

And is the volume really the issue? Its ok as long as its less than some other groups?
 
Are you kidding me?

Maybe you have forgotten all the "Kill Bush", or "I hope Cheney has a heart attack" or the online posting of names and addresses of Bush supporters and those people's houses being egged or them being harrassed?

And is the volume really the issue? Its ok as long as its less than some other groups?

Was Bush assassinated?
 
Cite my "bashing the right". I bashed the use of violent imagery, but if you want to put that in the "right" camp, be my guest. And in spite of what congenital liar ID says, I did NOT approve of pictures suggesting violence toward bush, and I double dog dare anybody to link up to my supposed approval.

Fuck you christy-I know that you NEVER called out prak; low- or any other poster who called for the assassination of Bush or Cheney... The sin of ommission is as great as the one of commission-especially in light of your always ready condemnation of anything you find objectionable by a conservative! You supported the ugly protests of lefties and the despicable crass and sometimes violent humor of lefties as "free speech".

AOL cannot be linked.
 
We get it. Jesus. Do you really think that your post is so evocative that it should be repeated time after time after time.

The fact that nobody responded to it doesn't mean that nobody saw it. It means that its not the mega board stopper that you think it is.

“Sarah Palin has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district and when people do that, they’ve gotta realize there are consequences to that action.”
Rep. Gabrielle Gifford
 
I agree that the anti-Bush rhetoric was despicable.

Here's the difference.

Was there an act of violence perpetrated by liberals?
 
Are you kidding me?

Maybe you have forgotten all the "Kill Bush", or "I hope Cheney has a heart attack" or the online posting of names and addresses of Bush supporters and those people's houses being egged or them being harrassed?

And is the volume really the issue? Its ok as long as its less than some other groups?


No, I'm not kidding one bit. Even at the height of anti-Bush sentiment, you didn't have popular mainstream Democrats or liberals in the media advocating violence like you have on the right over the past two years. It's not even a close call.

And it's never OK, but your false equivalence is bullshit.
 
There's plenty of blame to go around when it comes to talk about killing one's political foes. Such as:

Rush Limbaugh: "I tell people don’t kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus -- living fossils -- so we will never forget what these people stood for."

Ann Coulter: "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

Or: "We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed too."

Bill O’Reilly: “Everybody got it? Dissent, fine; undermining, you're a traitor. Got it? So, all those clowns over at the liberal radio network, we could incarcerate them immediately. Will you have that done, please? Send over the FBI and just put them in chains, because they, you know, they're undermining everything and they don't care, couldn't care less.”

Karl Rove: “Has there ever been a more revealing moment this year? Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals.”

Kathleen Parker: “Here's a note I got recently from a friend and former Delta Force member, who has been observing American politics from the trenches: ‘These bastards like Clark and Kerry and that incipient ass, Dean, and Gephardt and Kucinich and that absolute mental midget Sharpton, race baiter, should all be lined up and shot.’ "

Sharron Angle...a statement she made during a radio interview last January in which she floated the idea that the public would bring down an out-of-control Congress with "Second Amendment remedies."

Cite my "bashing the right". I bashed the use of violent imagery, but if you want to put that in the "right" camp, be my guest. And in spite of what congenital liar ID says, I did NOT approve of pictures suggesting violence toward bush, and I double dog dare anybody to link up to my supposed approval.

i can't believe you're serious...you have heavy partisan blinders on

point out any one on the left in your post above christie....further, point out anywhere you've called the left out for the vitriol talk etc
 
No, I'm not kidding one bit. Even at the height of anti-Bush sentiment, you didn't have popular mainstream Democrats or liberals in the media advocating violence like you have on the right over the past two years. It's not even a close call.

And it's never OK, but your false equivalence is bullshit.

yes there was, but since it came from the left, you chose to ignore it and now pretend it never happened

politics took a turn for the worse when bush was in office and it was by and large the liberals who steered that horse, both parties are responsible, but i don't recall a time in politics, before bush, where it was that full of hate
 
yes there was, but since it came from the left, you chose to ignore it and now pretend it never happened

No, there wasn't.

politics took a turn for the worse when bush was in office and it was by and large the liberals who steered that horse, both parties are responsible, but i don't recall a time in politics, before bush, where it was that full of hate

You're either wet behind the ears or your memory sucks.
 
One other thing non one is mentioning is the headline on the map with the targets on it: "We've diagnosed the problem . . . Help us prescribe the solution."

Yeah, nothing wrong with that.
 
i can't believe you're serious...you have heavy partisan blinders on

point out any one on the left in your post above christie....further, point out anywhere you've called the left out for the vitriol talk etc

You really aren't paying attention. I explained my reason for that C&P when I answered another comment. Maybe you need to go back and read the last 15 or so posts a little more carefully.

This thread was about the tragedy, not who supports whom. Maybe you want to play that game but it'll have to be with someone else. In any case, for every accusation of partisanship you level at me I can come back with twice the number for you.
 
yes there was, but since it came from the left, you chose to ignore it and now pretend it never happened

politics took a turn for the worse when bush was in office and it was by and large the liberals who steered that horse, both parties are responsible, but i don't recall a time in politics, before bush, where it was that full of hate

Then your memory is selective. Go back and study the eight Clinton years.
 
i can't believe you're serious...you have heavy partisan blinders on

point out any one on the left in your post above christie....further, point out anywhere you've called the left out for the vitriol talk etc

You will never find a christy post where she calls out someone on the left for being incendiary towards the right...no matter the imagery...ever!
 
You really aren't paying attention. I explained my reason for that C&P when I answered another comment. Maybe you need to go back and read the last 15 or so posts a little more carefully.

This thread was about the tragedy, not who supports whom. Maybe you want to play that game but it'll have to be with someone else. In any case, for every accusation of partisanship you level at me I can come back with twice the number for you.

bullshit, you have not once called out the left and when given the chance to show examples you of course gave only examples from the right

why you would deny that when your post is clear as day and still there is beyond me....
 
Then your memory is selective. Go back and study the eight Clinton years.

please show me posters, comments from people saying clinton is hitler, wanting to kill clinton, war criminal, etc....

don't worry, i won't wait, i have a hunch you won't reply to this with anything to support your nonsense claim
 
bullshit, you have not once called out the left and when given the chance to show examples you of course gave only examples from the right

why you would deny that when your post is clear as day and still there is beyond me....

Jesus.

WB commented that the left was all over bush with comments about killing him. I responded that the right was all over liberals with comments about killing them. I then stated that this vicious cycle of violent rhetoric has been in operation for years. Why are you not getting it? Clearly you haven't read anything in context; you're simply cherry-picking.
 
please show me posters, comments from people saying clinton is hitler, wanting to kill clinton, war criminal, etc....

don't worry, i won't wait, i have a hunch you won't reply to this with anything to support your nonsense claim

You did not mention "Hitler", "war criminal", etc. in your post. Your exact words were "politics took a turn for the worse when bush was in office and it was by and large the liberals who steered that horse, both parties are responsible, but i don't recall a time in politics, before bush, where it was that full of hate"

Hate is not defined only by words of your choosing, and it's obvious you weren't paying attention back then.


Alan Ehrenhalt's Review

Millions of Americans despise Bill Clinton. They have done so since he became a presence in national politics in the early 1990's, and they continue to do so today, more than four years after his retirement from public office.

The passion of the Clinton haters is a phenomenon without equal in recent American politics. It is not based on any specific policies that Clinton promoted or implemented during his years in office. It is almost entirely personal. In its persistence and intensity, it goes far beyond anything that comparable numbers of people have felt about Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan or either of the presidents Bush. It surpasses even the liberals' longstanding detestation of Richard Nixon. The only political obsession comparable to it in the past century is the hatred that a significant minority of Americans felt for Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Gene Kizer

People hated Clinton and still do because the entire time he was president, he was a monumental LIAR. His "Slick Willie" moniker is true, but understates his level of dishonesty. My entire life, when any president would come on TV, I would tune right in with full attention because it would be something important and, at least, appear truthful. When Clinton came on, I had to change the channel as quick as I could get to the TV, I mean I would jump up and fly across the room because I could not stand to even look at Clinton. He was so phony, so fake, and every word out of his mouth was some kind of lie.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the politically conservative American Spectator magazine received donations from conservative benefactors. The Arkansas project began shortly after Richard Mellon Scaife, one of the largest donors to the magazine, directed that his donations be used for stories aimed at investigating and discrediting the Clintons.


Bill Clinton's Skeleton Closet
 
Back
Top