Politicizing the AZ massacre

That's actually a complete lie. Nobody's asserted that Sarah Palin gave this guy marching orders - merely that conservative assassination rhetoric has fostered an environment where these events are sadly predictable.I'm sorry that you're feeling so deeply ashamed and defensive, Coyote, but defending your side isn't so important that you have to tell lies about this tragedy.

You guys sound like a bunch of christian soccer moms complaining that heavy metal has "fostered an environment where these events are sadly predictable" anytime some idiot light himself on fire because they saw it in a video.It's predictable in the same way as someone hurting themselves because they saw it on TV is predictable. It's not really predictable, it's one of those things that just happens.It's not South Park's fault if you light a fart and set your house on fire because you saw it on TV. South Park hasn't "fostered an environment where these events are sadly predictable." And yet I can predict that some idiot will do something stupid because they saw it on TV.Politicians get shot, idiots light themselves on fire. These things just happen.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

It's often the way.

When "metal" music comes to be as pervasive as "right wing political rhetoric", complete with a television network promoting that "metal" is the only acceptable form of music, then we've arrived at the point when "metal" and "right wing political rhetoric" are comparable items. Until then, "right wing political rhetoric" has far more power to twist susceptible minds into doing undesirable things.Moose"I prefer my metal music to be via a giant saxophone" Image via current avatar - Anthony Braxton playing what I believe to be a contrabass saxophone. At some future time this image will probably turn into that of a cat, having nothing to do with heavy metal.Edited by Minnemooseus, : Add big image after changing avatar.

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.

​

"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

​

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith

​

"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien

​

"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

If it's not predictable, Oni, then how did Giffords predict it?

Prediction? Hardly.What did she predict, that she'd be shot in the face by a gunman in Arizona? No, she said putting crosshairs over the district could have consequences.I tell you what, if it's predictable, tell me where and when the next one will be...or are we gonna keep playing hindsight psychic?- Oni

Is there a shred of evidence that Loughner ever visited Palin's website, let alone interpreted the crosshairs as a hit list? If not, then what relevance exists?This is nothing more than a cheap tactic for political sensationalism and nothing more. I'm referring to the media's attempt to somehow connect the dots back to Palin. Unless one can do so, it's incredibly irresponsible to make slanderous parallels during a time of tragedy.Even supposing Loughner did see the website, his misinterpretation could not somehow be an excusable defense anymore than a crazy man watching a movie about political assassinations, and him interpreting that as a hit. It's absurd and pathetic.To cling to something so asinine and irrelevant, you might as well blame Jodie Foster for Hinkley's attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. Who says it is?!?! When Democrats did it, was it a "veiled threat of violence?"http://gratewire.com/...get-symbols-on-maps-hyprocrisy-alertLike the blog suggests, should they use teddy bears with hearts to pinpoint a specific location? Outright??? Please stop being so melodramatic, this is blown WAY out of proportion. No, lest you seek to de facto remove Thomas Jefferson as having been the 3rd POTUS, or to "trim the fat" on the Declaration of Independence."But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."

---

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

And she specifically predicted that those consequences was violence against herself.Was that by accident, Oni? Was she just proven right by coincidence? Everybody who predicted that conservative assassination speech would incite some nut to violence - they've just been proven right roughly every six months or so just by accident?The massive uptick in threats made against Congressmen since 2008? That's just coincidence and has nothing at all to do with the sudden increase conservative murder analogies since 2008? That has nothing to do with the masses of armed men who rally under Tea Party banners? The DHS was utterly wrong to have released warnings against an increase in fringe right-wing violence, even though their warnings have proved to be true?

Nonsense. So, on top of it all, you want to restrict free speech? Prove that Loughner even saw the website. If you can't, then any equivocation is baseless conjecture.

---

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

Sadly, not surprising at all

---

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

What on Earth does that matter? Who says Loughner had to be a conservative to be influenced by conservative murder rhetoric? Seems like it's a pretty obvious fucking dot, Hyro. Don't you wonder why people objected to Palin's murder speech back in 2008? In 2009? Because we were all sure this would happen, someday. Hell, Tuscon isn't even the first. Did you forget the Ron Paul curbstomp? Did you forget "Kill Him!"? Did you forget "pallin' around with terrorists"? The IRS suicide plane? The shooter in Philadelphia who listened to almost nothing but Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck? The Department of Homeland Security warnings about the surge in right-wing related violence?Nobody's saying that Sarah Palin wanted anybody to die. But the reason politicians shouldn't use assassination language isn't because politicians shouldn't want their opponents to be killed, it's because, as national media figures, they have a responsibility to use speech that doesn't incite crazy people to violence. Slander? Did Sharon Angle not invoke "Second Amendment remedies"? Did Sarah Palin put a crosshairs on Giffords' district or not? Did Sarah Palin urge her followers to "reload" instead of retreating, or not? But Democrats didn't do it. Dart boards aren't crosshairs. But Jodie Foster did bear some responsibility for the attempted assassination of Reagan. Jodie Foster should not have gone on TV and said that someone should "shoot Reagan." After the assassination, Jodie Foster largely stopped doing late-night talk shows. Sarah Palin just doubled-down with anti-semetic posturing that tries to portray Palin, hilariously, as one of the victims of Tuscon. Yeah, outright. What else is it when a politician holds an event where supporters fire an automatic weapon at a picture of their opponent? Thomas Jefferson was talking about opposing tyranny, not opposing the will of the people. Thomas Jefferson recognized the utility of warfare in achieving the right to have an election - but never with the aim of achieving a specific electoral outcome.Frankly, Hyro, this is the kind of apocalyptic murder language I'm talking about. If you think you can find support from Jefferson for the idea of shooting your opponents because they beat you in a fair election, you're insane and dangerous.

The First Amendment protects you from government oppression of your viewpoint, not from moral outrage. I've not advocated for any restrictions on anybody's speech.There's no need to tell lies to defend your side, Hyro. What need, when it was broadcast on TV? Are you saying Loughner never watched TV? That he never was on the internet? That he had never heard of Sarah Palin?Why does Loughner need to have been a conservative to have been influenced by Sarah Palin, or by other examples of conservative assassination rhetoric, particularly when such examples usually make the national news and are disseminated far outside their original context? Just because you forgot about "Second Amendment remedies" - note that the Second Amendment, in fact, actually has no remedy for electoral outcomes you don't like - doesn't mean that Loughner did.

Did this dude shoot because of the crosshairs? Was this dude motivated by Palin? Was he a Tea Party follower and/or was he inspired by their hate rhetoric?Truth is, there is no evidence to support any of that, and that is evidence needed to support the "she predicted it" theory.All you have is a guy who shot a group of people who some happen to be involved in politics. The correlation you guys are trying to draw is based purely on speculation.What would that be called in court, circumstantial evidence, Subbie?And it's the same correlation that people try to draw when South Park or heavy metal or a book is said to have inspired someone to do harm. It's weak.- Oni

Ah, right, so if Sen. Biden in '08 when running for president said about Republicans, "And at the New Hampshire primaries, we're coming gunning for you" *wild cheers and applause from the crowd*, it would constitute "murder language?" Or is it, you know, a figure of speech? Yes she is, but not for the reasons you think. She's dangerous because she's an idiot and a big government interventionist. Giffords payed the price for idiotic people in the mental health industry who allow people like this on the street.As stated by a fellow student in one of Loughner's classes, she knew he was going to be one of those people who like Columbine or the VA Tech massacre. She reported his behavior, no one investigated it.I find more fault with professionals who surely knew this kid was a loose cannon. That's irresponsibility, not crosshairs on a website that no one can even prove Loughner saw or interpreted on.

---

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

I don't know, I think that is a weak argument too. I saw most of what has been reported on him and it doesn't sound too far off from how many kids are. I knew a lot of people in high school who could have been diagnosed the same as him, and none have killed anyone. How many cheerleaders and jocks would say that same thing about any goth kid? Or the loner kid who likes to be by himself and read?Should they really investigate these opinions? The crosshairs I agree with, but the professionals dropping the ball part not so much. Maybe they did, but from the evidence I've seen his behavior wasn't that insane to draw that much of a warning sign.- Oni