Tucson Sheriff Clarence Dupnik:
"Let me just say one thing, because people tend to poo-poo this business about all the vitriol that we hear inflaming the American public by people who make a living off of doing that.
That may be free speech. But it’s not without consequences."
Fit to repost“gun crosshairs on the Democrats in Congress” at the Palin facebook page.
Posted by: BlackRhino | January 08, 2011 at 11:55 PM
The rationalization of political remarks encouraging or invoking violence must end, now.
Posted by: sparky | January 09, 2011 at 12:01 AM
A nut case going on a shooting rampage...
Open season on all gun owners for a week or two now.
Of course, Palin will get the blame from many on the left for "instructing" this idiot to do what he did.
This is the first internet mud I've seen so far on that one.
It's a horrible incident and therefore another great story to manipulate for an agenda.
Very sad story.
Posted by: Rat_Bastard | January 09, 2011 at 12:10 AM
i can't believe the jackass hasn't replaced the crosshairs with something else, that is actually responsible.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 12:18 AM
OK, just saw something interesting about this shooter in question...
His site is still up for those who want to see it.
(For the time being)
http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10#p/u
His favorite books include:
The Communist Manifesto
Mein Kampf
(Not sure if Sarah Palin told him to read those)
Posted by: Rat_Bastard | January 09, 2011 at 01:01 AM
so, apparently Palin removed the "reload" crapola from the page, but refused to remove the crosshairs. This proves she is just a stubborn jackass at best, something more sinister at worst. I easily thought of an alternative. She could have changesd it to an image of the Democrat donkey inside the European "prohibited "symbol, the circle with the diagonal bar. That way you convey the message that you are targeting these Congress people politically , not personally with a suggestion of violence.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 01:26 AM
And who should we blame, Bastard? Have you heard or seen anybody on the left post such violent references?
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 01:39 AM
Black Rhino appears to be playing games with the Palin Facebook page. I went independently to her page and i couldnt find the map with the crosshairs. Rhino's link has the map with the crosshairs above and below it a thread of comments that are about the Arizona shooting, so obviously posted today. The map does not exist on her current facebook page. Did she remove it within the last few hours?
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 01:46 AM
Yes, actually I've seen many left wing extremists as well as right wing calling for violence.
(for whatever reason, ELF,ALF,etc.)
There will never be a shortage of people who think that this type of thing serves their desires.
It's the initial blame being thrown at Sarah Palin that was obvious to come about right away.
It's pathetic.
How about just letting the one lone nut job take the blame for what he did?
I guess that just doesn't fit the needs of the left.
Posted by: Rat_Bastard | January 09, 2011 at 01:52 AM
ok the Joanie-esque woman doing the overnight on KGO just said that Palin removed the map with the crosshairs on it from her Facebook page just within the last few hours.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 02:21 AM
The original map was posted on her FB in march of last year Within a few days she changed the "reload" to something innocuous. The crosshairs have apparently up on the map until just a few hours ago. The crosshairs were equally as bad as the "reload" if not worse. Why just remove one and not the other, unless you're just an ignorant , irresponsible and stubborn jackass.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 02:29 AM
Today's event will have and should have the effect of dramatically lowering the stature of Palin in the future. She will be held accountable for this completley unacceptable imagery on her website. She legally has the right to do it, but it was not the righ thing to do.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 03:10 AM
This is such a sad and apparently avoidable act by at least one crazed person. (another person of interest is still being sought per AP)
You read about his conduct at his local community college and it is evident that he had been exhibiting delusional and paranoid signs for a long time. It points to the fact that in our country a significant number of people are mentally ill and not receiving the proper care.
Although any loss of life is sad,it is the thought of a nine year old child being taken away that strikes home.
I really wish folks would take the time to understand that politics is second to that. Moreover, I really wish that folks would take the time to let the facts come to light as to what happened so we can see if there is a way to avoid such a tragedy in the future.
Posted by: Puget Sound | January 09, 2011 at 05:42 AM
Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dipnik called Arizona the capital of anger, hatred and bigotry, and he said unbalanced people can respond to that in dangerous ways.
Which radio stations might be be referring to? Probably the right wing blowtorches in Phoenix. KFYI, the Rush Limbaugh station owned by Clear Channel; and KTAR the bigoted hate-fest station owned by Bonneville.
Posted by: Earl Shankmeister | January 09, 2011 at 06:09 AM
yes, Let's not generalize about large groups of people based on Jared Lee Loughner's actions, unless it turns out he's Muslim.
I would say that the guilt felt right now from the right is amusing, except most feel no guilt. Just a lot of words trying to spin away all the words of the psst. Im just sorry it took the death of a 9 year old to make them face those words head on. Im sure Beck and Limbaugh have their teams working overtime today coming up with the official explanation of how this is someone else's fault.
Unless you were outraged by Sharon Angle's words of '2nd amendment remedies' during her campaign and the support Palin was giving her,and her opponent's invitation to go shooting with him, your "outrage" over this is meaningless.
And Bastard,,comparing a fringe group like Elf to prominent media figures...lame. What Elf does is disgusting, but its not the same.
Posted by: sparky | January 09, 2011 at 07:59 AM
And so, I issue this challenge to you, Puget Sound and KS and Chucks..are you willing to, right now, stop with all the name calling? I go first--from now on, I refer to Puget Sound by his posted name, and I will not engage in name calling.
waiting...
Posted by: sparky | January 09, 2011 at 08:04 AM
accepted.
Posted by: Puget Sound | January 09, 2011 at 08:24 AM
yeah let's not forget that creep Sharon Angle, with her "2nd amendment rmedies" statement. Absolutely outrageous. If you check the posts you'll find that i called Angle a nutbat last election day and celebrated her defeat along with the defeat of the other Salin-supported nutbats around the country. So don't even think about goign there with me, to our lib posters here. I called Rand Paul an extremist and a kookbutt. Angle's comment is clear incitement to violence that i'd think she could be arrested for.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 08:54 AM
I am watching a live video feed of a press conference with the doctors who treated the Congresswoman...the surgeon said the bullet did not pass through both hemispheres but laterally through the left hemisphere..he said that is fortunate.
There was not a tremendous amount of blood loss either, another good thing.
Posted by: sparky | January 09, 2011 at 09:14 AM
Well, I'm glad that she took the image down, " a few hours later" How fucking lame of her to wait til some massacre which might make her 'look bad'. The 2nd amendment folks looks pretty stupid now.
Posted by: Coiler | January 09, 2011 at 09:17 AM
Here you are Tommy, I acquired the link from TPM.
The headline of the article: “FLASHBACK: Gabby Giffords Faced Threats Over Heath Care Vote”
The point of the article does not revolve around how long these threats prevailed, but that they occurred at all.
Posted by: BlackRhino | January 09, 2011 at 09:38 AM
I remember lamester Monson a few weeks ago chuckling over the Palin opponents and wondering aloud (paraphrase) "I think Palin is harmless and entertaining . I've never understand what her opponents get all worked up over her about." Lameass Monson, this Palin facebook crap is one of the reasons. Palin is not "harmless".
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 09:41 AM
right BR. but for a few minutes i thought that maybe Palin had taken the crosshair map down back in March (She changed the reload back in March) and that someone had doctored a link to trick people into thinking that she still had it up. Now i find out that she had it up until yesterday evening. I'm already on record as saying that she should have taken down the crosshairs the same time she took down the "reload". I've made it clear that my view is they should not have been put up at all, in the first place, either the "reload" or the crosshairs.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 09:55 AM
Tommy,
I have the same opinion, take a look at the article; it’ll raise the hair on the back of your neck. I seen a picture of the child this morning. She is incredibly cute. Looking back at the past year or so, I can’t believe she was the price we had to pay to realize our folly.
Posted by: BlackRhino | January 09, 2011 at 10:04 AM
Seems most people will let the shooter's actions speak to who he is, and not put blame on anything else...
The shooter at Fort Hood was a nut.
Islam didn't "make" him do anything.
Abortion clinic bombers are nuts.
Their religion didn't "make" them do anything.
We all have our political beliefs, but we can also get along together while we have our arguments.
This tragedy shouldn't be used as agenda building for either side.
People sometimes do crazy things, simply because they are crazy.
Saying that politics or religion "made" them do it is what a defense attorny will say.
Posted by: Rat_Bastard | January 09, 2011 at 10:58 AM
Wait until someone starts combing the transcripts of radio hate shows from Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, etc. They have just as much blood on their hands as Princess Palin.
Posted by: casual observer | January 09, 2011 at 11:08 AM
Bullshit. Blaming Sarah Palin for this is idiotic. From the NY Times: But the rambling, disconnected writings and videos he has left on the Web are consistent with the delusions produced by a psychotic illness like schizophrenia, which develops most often in the teens or 20s.
It looks like he was mentally ill.
Posted by: Crabalockerfishwife | January 09, 2011 at 11:19 AM
I disagree, RB. Actions and words all have consequences. It's not about the shooter's political preferences or lack of them. It's about the language and the visuals used to stir people up. I don't think in her wildest dreams Sarah Palin thought someone would get killed because of her "reload" comments and that poster that put politicians in gunsights--which she now insisting were "surveyor marks." But a lot of people were worried --INCLUDING REP. GIFFORD--that was exactly what would happen. Instead of Ms. Palin releasing a comment saying she regretted the use of that imagery, instead of Sharon Angle saying she was sorry about the "2nd Amendment Solutions", instead of the crazy woman back east who said that the "ballot box might have to be replaced with the bullet box" coming out and saying that was a wrong thing to say--they are all trying to excuse it all, and in some cases, even lie about it. That is irresponsible, and has proven deadly.
Posted by: sparky | January 09, 2011 at 11:31 AM
Sarah Palin is not responsible for this. The young, troubled man who fired all the shots is responsible.
But, if I was Sarah Palin and I knew my 'people' put crosshairs on candidates on a website and then someone shot that candidate and killed several people including a 9-year old girl, I'd probably put a shotgun to my own head and pull the trigger.
Posted by: Earl Shankmeister | January 09, 2011 at 12:31 PM
I think Sparky and Tommy both say it well. Unstable people are vulnerable to the rhetoric and iconography of hate. I don't think anyone could disagree with that In the end, their actions alone did the job. But to excuse the behavior and words of people who use violent images and messages is an abrogation of common sense.
I never said Muslim rhetoric didn't contribute to the shooting at Fort Hood. He was muslim. We 'll never know to what degree the anti-muslim hate talk from the same people contributed to that event. He was unstatble. What incited him to violence, Bastard? Seems like an event that makes our case rather than yours.
And McVeigh? Another young man who hated government - considered it a bully. I don't know why he hated government. Do you, Bastard? Could it have been the right-wing message machine?
There are unstable people prone to violence. This discussion is about what it takes to target their violence toward one group or another.
And ELF and ALF? C'mon. I had to google both to find out who they were. I didn't have to google Palin to find that out. And casual observer is so correct: it includes all the violent hate talk from the right. Sparky has tried for years to talk reasonably with you guys. I've joined the party of name-calling but I did that in defense. It will be interesting to see if those who started it can really stop. And, Tommy, you name call with the best. You said you don't name call other posters but you name call everything we believe in often. That's how the "racist" term appeared. That was a response to your constant name calling of a group of people that made me and others uncomfortable.
So don't rest on your laurels too much.
We start anew? Gonna be hard.
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 12:41 PM
Tommy: I just realized a difference between us: my name calling is directed at the posters themselves. I take you on one by one. You, Tommy, hate-talk whole groups of people outside the blog and now me. Which do you think is more insidious? I have my opinion, but what's yours? Which do you think is more likely to galvanize an unstable reader to action?
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 12:51 PM
haha Joanie. haha Joanie. Teeheeheee, I'm giving you a D!!!
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 01:31 PM
And so it goes . . .
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 01:33 PM
yes, an honorable person might very likely do what you mentioned, Earl, I agree, especially in Japan, but do any of us really think someone who quits the Governor's office half way through her term, abrogating her promise to those who voted her in, only so she could make a boatload of moolah as fast as she could, is really honorable? The answer is obvious.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 02:23 PM
Also, as Sparky mentioned, instead of apologizing for the crosshairs, Palin is now trotting out the pathetic prevarication that the crosshairs were actually "surveyors sites". Now she is just flat out lying to try to protect her ass. At the time of the original controversy back in March, I didn't hear any denials that the circles were rifle crosshairs. They were just quietly left on the maps after some hoopla was made about changing the "reload " to re-organize. Only now do we hear that they're surveyor's sites, after this horrible shooting rampage. Despicable and sleazy.
Posted by: Tommy008 | January 09, 2011 at 02:34 PM
It was out there for all to see, there was at least one politico voicing concern over the violent discourse.
Posted by: BlackRhino | January 09, 2011 at 02:44 PM
Concentrating on Palin isn't solving the problem. She is a symptom of the problem. A purveyor of the problem. One of many.
Rewatching Chris Hedges Death of the Liberal Class and he nails it. Not a simple answer.
I will never vote for another non-progressive Democrat.
Yes, I know what that means. But until more people separate from what used to be the party of labor (the workforce) and education, nothing will change and Republican (corporate) policies will win out.
They are winning anyway. But no longer with my help.
BTW, over 60% of the people think we should reduce the deficit by taxing the rich and getting out of wars.
BTW2, Chris Hedges is no Democrat. And he believes the tea party has a legitimate complaint.
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 03:09 PM
FOX News is already trying to spin this as "Loughner is insane, therefore violent right-wing rhetoric is irrelevent". They're trying to shame those who are speaking out about the danger of inflaming the public with hate. Within 24 hours of this shooting they're squirming to let themselves off the hook. What a class outfit.
Posted by: tigsnort | January 09, 2011 at 03:29 PM
..."For example, we're on Sarah Palin's targeted list, but the thing is, that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they have to realize that there are consequences to that action," Giffords said in an interview with MSNBC.
...sheriff blamed the vitriolic political rhetoric that has consumed the country, much of it centered in Arizona.
"When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous," he said. "And unfortunately, Arizona, I think, has become the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 03:38 PM
"Concentrating on Palin isn't solving the problem." what twaddle. Do you have to be such a control freak? People are venting about Palin, right now, not trying to "solve the problem" today.
Posted by: Big Jim and the twins | January 09, 2011 at 03:59 PM
Hi chux. Nothing much on your mind as usual?
Check out HA - great visual and lively thread.
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 04:03 PM
you are the original "horse's ass", not Goldy.
Posted by: Big Jim and the twins | January 09, 2011 at 04:06 PM
Didn't you just say this thread was about Palin? Forgetfulnes? Too bad. Tends to happen to unused brains.
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 04:11 PM
"That may be free speech. But it’s not without consequences."
Followers of Beck, Palin, Angle, etc. are probably delighted with the consequences. They didn't have a problem with the bald faced inference, why would they have a problem with the realized outcome?
The laws pertaining to the inciting of violence need to be expanded or clarified such that it's not OK to draw cross hairs on your opponent, or something that represents them.
Posted by: Andrew | January 09, 2011 at 04:16 PM
I will be watching to see how different radio and tv personalities react to this. It's a given that everyone will be outraged. What I want to see is who will step up to the plate and say they will dial it back. Keith Olbermann did that last night. I don't hold out much hope for any of the others. Can't even make it happen here.
Posted by: sparky | January 09, 2011 at 04:22 PM
I'm wondering if Olbermann can dial it back. You said it: "can't even make it happen here." As long as the right continues to use the rhetoric of hatred, the left will have to respond. If you keep turning the other cheek, your face will become bloodier and bloodier. That's not the answer.
Education is the answer. But a lot of adults choose not to learn but to believe. And they go where their beliefs are reinforced. To quote Ed: "That's where we are."
Now one of our usual idiots (no suspicion here) will take on a rant about Ed even though they don't know him.
Out of the mouth of one of the victims (above) and out of the mouth of the sheriff. Means nothing to the believers.
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 04:31 PM
Over the next week you'll see a lot of right wing pundits in victim mode, trying to deflect responsibility back onto the left. Same old same old.
Posted by: tigsnort | January 09, 2011 at 04:52 PM
Rewatching Chris Hedges Death of the Liberal Class and he nails it. Not a simple answer.
I will never vote for another non-progressive Democrat.
Yes, I know what that means. But until more people separate from what used to be the party of labor (the workforce) and education, nothing will change and Republican (corporate) policies will win out.
They are winning anyway. But no longer with my help.
BTW, over 60% of the people think we should reduce the deficit by taxing the rich and getting out of wars.
BTW2, Chris Hedges is no Democrat. And he believes the tea party has a legitimate complaint.
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 03:09 PM
I've been advocating that -- Progressives should vote for Progressives-- for awhile now. Your Blue Dogs turned out to be largely Bush Dogs even after Bush left.
It shows the folly of the Rahm Emmanuel Strategy.
And now that Pres Obama put Daley in as Chief of Staff, he isn't tackng to the left. He's going for the middle: triangulation --witness those Bush Tax Cuts.
it's clear that in the 2012 primaries that Progressives will need to primary him to get him back to the left.
Nader is too old, probably not Kucinich, but what about a Russ Feingold?
He has plenty of time...
Posted by: Puget Sound | January 09, 2011 at 04:52 PM
You know, Puget Sound, nothing you post interests me in the least. I'm surprised you haven't figured that out yet.
Posted by: joanie | January 09, 2011 at 04:55 PM
It's 1994 all over again. With the exception of not as large of a GOP win. The President will get the nomination. And like OKC, we've had another nut job trying to influence politics.
Posted by: Coiler | January 09, 2011 at 05:05 PM