[Abyss]

worrywort, on 09 January 2011 - 09:53 PM, said:

Actually, she's claiming something even more stupid:
http://www.huffingto...a_n_806375.html

I particularly like this bit...

Quote

"It was simply crosshairs like you'd see on maps." Bruce suggested that they could, in fact, be seen as "surveyor's symbols." Mansour added that "it never occurred to us that anybody would consider it violent"

[cerveza_fiesta]

Before I say anything, the "surveyor mark" think has got to be the most idiotic piece of spin I've heard in recent memory. It's shameful that palin's spin factory would try to pass it off that way instead of just apologizing. She'll lose way more credibility this way for sure.

worrywort, on 08 January 2011 - 11:47 PM, said:

Seems like the shooter was a genuine nut, based on his youtube videos and such, with hints of influence from the palin/tea party side of things, as opposed to someone on the more traditional right/left spectrum. In other words he may have had political motivations, but they were malformed, scattershot, and more or less crazy rather than a fleshed out ideology (lib or con). His genuine insanity doesn't let Palin/Beck/neo-Gingrich types off the hook for their baiting rhetoric, of course, as they (deliberately) pave the roads these types travel.

Gotta agree. To a crazy inclined to violence, it doesn't matter who's feeding him the material that eventually works him into a murderous rage. He's gonna go off and shoot somebody regardless of the rightey-leftiness of his cause. It's like the "violence & videogames" argument. Sure videogames glorify violence, but sane people can distinguish reality from fiction. The crazies will receive an entirely different experience.

I'd love to think that this might stun some sense into politics-based media (the glen beck types) and the most vocal politicians (palin and her crosshairs map) and that they might woah-back on the rhetoric for a bit, realizing the type of behaviour they're encouraging...but that aint gonna happen. At least it's a bit of egg on their face in the minds of most sane people.

I'm just glad to see that in general, everybody is drawing back from this. Politics being what they are, people will happily argue and yell at each other until their heads explode, but when somebody actually gets killed for their views (much less a congresswoman) it's nice to see that everybody, regardless of political stripe, stops for a second to ground themselves. It may be worth killing/dying for your freedom, but I think the majority of folks, however vocal, realize that killing a congresswoman because of a few unpopular policies is outright condemnable.

It's also easy to pick out the actual crazies at moments like this, cause anybody celebrating the shooting publicly is definitely somebody to watch out for in the future.

This post has been edited by cerveza_fiesta: 10 January 2011 - 04:17 PM

[Abyss]

cerveza_fiesta, on 10 January 2011 - 04:15 PM, said:

...the "surveyor mark" think has got to be the most idiotic piece of spin I've heard in recent memory. It's shameful that palin's spin factory would try to pass it off that way instead of just apologizing.

Apologizing for what?
She or her people used an obvious visual to make it clear they were 'targetting' certain dems in upcoming elections.
There's nothing 'wrong' with this on its face, uness one subscribes to the view that any use of gun related imagery inspires violence in the mentally whacked, which may be the fault of many things, but can't be tagged on Palin and co. (there are many, many other things we can joyfully tie to them, but not this...).

Quote

She'll lose way more credibility this way for sure. ...

Darn.
And i mean that in a good way.

But given her relative popularity, it's unlikely this latest bit of stupid will swing anyone's opinion away from where it was. The tea partiers still love her and the dems and most reasonable republicans still consider her a media-exacerbated mess.

[cerveza_fiesta]

Abyss, on 10 January 2011 - 04:31 PM, said:

cerveza_fiesta, on 10 January 2011 - 04:15 PM, said:

...the "surveyor mark" think has got to be the most idiotic piece of spin I've heard in recent memory. It's shameful that palin's spin factory would try to pass it off that way instead of just apologizing.

Apologizing for what?
She or her people used an obvious visual to make it clear they were 'targetting' certain dems in upcoming elections.
There's nothing 'wrong' with this on its face, uness one subscribes to the view that any use of gun related imagery inspires violence in the mentally whacked, which may be the fault of many things, but can't be tagged on Palin and co. (there are many, many other things we can joyfully tie to them, but not this...).

Should have phrased that differently. I don't mean to say she or her crosshair poster was the actual cause at all.

"They are targets. The crosshair is a universally accepted symbol used to denote a point in space. Crazy gunmen and overzealous reporters can spin that however they want, Palin did nothing wrong whatsoever. The fault lies with the man who pulled the trigger...now bugger off."

Now, if palin's spin factory came out with a statement like that, the matter would have ended there. By lying about the "surveyor marks" she looks simultaneously culpable and moronic.

Abyss, on 10 January 2011 - 04:31 PM, said:

But given her relative popularity, it's unlikely this latest bit of stupid will swing anyone's opinion away from where it was. The tea partiers still love her and the dems and most reasonable republicans still consider her a media-exacerbated mess.

Which is a good thing. Thank god her TV show got canceled. But that is a discussion for another thread...

This post has been edited by cerveza_fiesta: 10 January 2011 - 05:24 PM

[Beezulbubba]

Palin has been pretty prolific posting on Facebook and Twitter. I noticed she hasn't posted anything since her comment Saturday about the shooting. Her PR folks must have told her to lay low and let someone else in her entourage take the heat.

- - - "Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"

[Abyss]

cerveza_fiesta, on 10 January 2011 - 04:57 PM, said:

...Thank god her TV show got canceled....

I was sort of hoping it would get renewed for many, many seasons. [/irony]


Curious was the outcry from some politios that the current bloodthirstiness in US politics is to blame for this.

Nice sentiment but who are they kidding? Nuts will as nuts is.

[Aptorian]

There's some pretty crazy stuff surfacing right now. Here's a quote from Glenn Beck from 2005 talking about killing Michael Moore:

Quote

BECK: Hang on, let me just tell you what I'm thinking. I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out -- is this wrong? I stopped wearing my What Would Jesus -- band -- Do, and I've lost all sense of right and wrong now. I used to be able to say, "Yeah, I'd kill Michael Moore," and then I'd see the little band: What Would Jesus Do? And then I'd realize, "Oh, you wouldn't kill Michael Moore. Or at least you wouldn't choke him to death." And you know, well, I'm not sure.

You can hear the audio clip here along with a bunch of other angry people:

http://videocafe.cro...rnal-rage-radio

[worry]

On the contrary, Abyss. There are some nuts people who shoot up a crowd of any kind, and there are some nuts people who target specific politicians because of their policies. They may lack Reason, but they do not lack reasons. And among his reasons seem to be US currency (if you aren't aware, there's a HUGE but mostly informal push from the right, Glen Beck in particular but many other Fox Newsers, to cleave to the gold or silver standard, or abandon the dollar all together for gold -- this seriously just happened: http://www.huffingto...r_n_802618.html ); immigration from Mexico (I doubt I have to reiterate the absolutely heinous stuff coming out of Arizona on that front); and general mistrust of the government (under Dems/Obama specifically) with the occasionally-but-not-always subtle rhetoric about revolution and violent overthrow. Sarah Palin has called on people to "Don't retreat, reload" while Sharron Angle referred to "2nd Amendment remedies" in getting Harry Reid out of office. And these are two mainstream voices of the new right, what voices are saying on talk radio is even worse. So crazy people will do crazy things, of course, but this guy wasn't getting instructions from a dog or anything. He's the natural, inevitable offspring of the Beck/Palin mating. And watch out, cuz neither of them support use of birth control.

This post has been edited by worrywort: 10 January 2011 - 08:11 PM

[worry]

And when I say "new right" what I am referring to is the total divorce from intellectually conservative ideology, or intellectualism in general at all. These are not conservatives in the same way progressives are progressive, or even past conservative thinkers were conservative. It's a megachurch + militia monster built by faux-libertarian neo-conservatives and brought to life by the electricity provided by Fox News.

[HoosierDaddy]

Yes, reportedly responding to some verbal commands to wiggle toes and fingers. Doctors remain "cautiously optimistic."

This post has been edited by HoosierDaddy: 10 January 2011 - 11:06 PM

[Illuyankas]

...Wow.

[King Lear]

Is it just me, or is Glenn Beck being slightly more subtle than usual?. -http://www.glennbeck...ians-and-media/
Apparently, he thinks it's time to 'stop playing politics'. Which is all very well and nice, but hard to take seriously when he sets Jared Loughner firmly on the left side of the political spectrum: "He was an atheist, believed George W. Bush was responsible for 9/11, feared a global currency, cited the Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books and thought the Mars rover landing was staged." Not including, of course that another was Ayn Rand's "We Are the Living". Faaah. (From his Youtube account info apparently) Not playing politics, my foot.

Annnd apparently Palin's page is being edited pretty ruthlessly at the moment. http://obamalondon.b...rah-palins.html
I guess it doesn't add much to the discussion, but pretty interesting.

Gah, Illy beat me to it.

This post has been edited by King Lear: 11 January 2011 - 12:33 AM

[cerveza_fiesta]

that comment from palin's FB page is disgusting. Why the hell does anybody give her the time of day?

I'm amazed at what this story has morphed into however...

It started with blame on Palin for putting up a crosshairs map, and has quickly shifted into a massive blamefest on the right-leaning pundits and news organizations. Of course they haven't stayed silent on the issue, I heard a clip from O'reilly on the CBC news this morning lashing out in a personal attack on the sheriff in charge of the case for suggesting that right-leaning media goaded the shooter into doing what he did.

But the core tragedies of the Columbine, virginia tech, etc... shootings turned into close examination and modification of the rules (for the better really) surrounding bullying, hazing and all sorts of other related psychological traumas.

The big difference between this and Columbine is that the backlash is pointed at one side of the political spectrum instead of being pointed at bullies & crazies. I bet the discussions (and attacks) get very interesting in the coming weeks.

[Shinrei]

There is a lot of irresponsible speculation being thrown around. 6 people are dead, shot by a nutcase. Pinning this on political rhetoric and pundits is unnecessary and is just going to serve to further inflame things.

I'm hearing a lot of "We must keep this in perspective" with one breath and "We must lay blame" with the next.

[Aptorian]

Funny thing, I was reading yet another thread throwing criticism at the Republicans when somebody pulled out a long list of similar aggressive rhetoric coming from Democrats and their supporters. Both sides are a bunch of nutballs.

[Abyss]

Jenisapt Rul, on 11 January 2011 - 02:00 PM, said:

... Both sides are a bunch of nutballs.

True in some respects, but the republican nutballs are the ones with more guns, hence, they have to yell louder to drown out the sounds of shell casings falling uncomfortably close to home.

[cerveza_fiesta]

Jenisapt Rul, on 11 January 2011 - 02:00 PM, said:

Funny thing, I was reading yet another thread throwing criticism at the Republicans when somebody pulled out a long list of similar aggressive rhetoric coming from Democrats and their supporters. Both sides are a bunch of nutballs.

Do you have that blog link? I'd love to read it for the comparison.

[Aptorian]

No but check out reddits front page. It was one of the top voted "shooting" threads last night. It wasn't a blog, just a redditor providing a dozen or so links to examples of democrat spin.

This post has been edited by Jenisapt Rul: 11 January 2011 - 05:17 PM

[D'iversify]

King Lear, on 11 January 2011 - 12:30 AM, said:

Is it just me, or is Glenn Beck being slightly more subtle than usual?. -http://www.glennbeck...ians-and-media/
Apparently, he thinks it's time to 'stop playing politics'. Which is all very well and nice, but hard to take seriously when he sets Jared Loughner firmly on the left side of the political spectrum: "He was an atheist, believed George W. Bush was responsible for 9/11, feared a global currency, cited the Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books and thought the Mars rover landing was staged." Not including, of course that another was Ayn Rand's "We Are the Living".

Another favourite book of Mr Loughner's not so far mentioned is a certain well known Austrian's post-Beer Hall Putsch prison memoir regards his 'personal struggle'. I hear some on the US right don't like this particular publication because it's a little 'socialist' (though in truth it's more '-socialist', if you gather my meaning).

[masan's saddle]

King Lear, on 11 January 2011 - 12:30 AM, said:

Is it just me, or is Glenn Beck being slightly more subtle than usual?. -http://www.glennbeck...ians-and-media/
Apparently, he thinks it's time to 'stop playing politics'. Which is all very well and nice, but hard to take seriously when he sets Jared Loughner firmly on the left side of the political spectrum: "He was an atheist, believed George W. Bush was responsible for 9/11, feared a global currency, cited the Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books and thought the Mars rover landing was staged." Not including, of course that another was Ayn Rand's "We Are the Living". Faaah. (From his Youtube account info apparently) Not playing politics, my foot.

Annnd apparently Palin's page is being edited pretty ruthlessly at the moment. http://obamalondon.b...rah-palins.html
I guess it doesn't add much to the discussion, but pretty interesting.

Gah, Illy beat me to it.

I just read/squirmed my way through that Glenn Beck page.

The man is so full of shit he squeaks.

The "pledge" thing at the end is hysterical with regards to what he has said in the past. He has no shame and is nothing more than a self-aggrandizing charlatan seeing another opportunity for more publicity, what a twat.

Sorry for stating the obvious but he really makes my skin crawl.