Liberals here want to blame conservatives for Ariz shooting?

[Jim in CT]

When I heard about the rampage, the first thing I did was say a prayer for the families. The second thing I did was wonder how long it would take the liberals to seize upon an opportunity to blame this on conservatives.

Turns out, it didn't take long.

Karl F, on another thread, posted that Sarah Palin had a "crosshair" over her on a map of vulnerable Democrats that had seats that were up for grabs this November. Karl, do you really believe that map is a contributing factor in what happened? Do you have any evidence, any whatsoever, to support that? Do you really think that Palin had violence on her mind when she used that graphic? Karl, are you similarly upset when Democrats do things like that? Do you really think that Democrats don't use the same language during campaigns?

Further evidence of why you have to have something wrong with your brain to be a part of the liberal movement. When Obama says "we have to fight in battleground states", that's OK. When Palin says the same thing, she's inciting violence.

I watched the coverage on MSNBC just to hear what they were saying, and they kept talking about "right wing vitriol". Look, I agree 100% that it would do us all good if we dialed it back a bit, and I'm as guilty of that as anyone here. But if you listened to MSNBC, you'd think that only conservatives spew vitriol. This is a network that only refers to the tea party as "tea baggers", yet they claim that only conservatives participate in this kind of behavior. And no one on the left, NO ONE, suggests that MSNBC is wrong for pretending that only conservatives behave this way. It's unbelievable. MSNBC can do a segment on how mean Foxnews is for spewing hate, and in the very next segment, they call the tea party "a bunch of tea baggers", and no one on the left sees anything wrong with that.

Bury the dead, and let the cops investigate. If the guy was a member of the Tea Party, since when do we hold an entire group responsible for the actions of a single kook? Are liberals suggesting that we hold all blacks accountable for the actions of the worst apples in the barrel? Or are liberals suggesting that only conservative groups are all responsible for everything that each of them do?

You people literally have no shame, and your hypocrisy knows no bounds. I truly hate these people (the ones who would blame this tragedy on those with different political opinions), I really do.

[Nebe]

Welcome to my ignore list.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Welcome to my ignore list.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Took you this long?

Come on now, none of these gems did it for you:
"Liberals here want to blame conservatives for Ariz shooting?"
"Is Pelosi a liar or a lunatic?"
"From who did Obama "inherit" the economic mess?"
"Liberalism - let all the criminals go, it's not their fault"

The line for me was:
His attempt to correlate Indiana Medicaid denying a baby a transplant, which was due largely to the Republican Governor's budget cuts, with the Obama health care proposal at the time. Then to use that correlation to defend Palin's idiot Death Panel comments.

Like I said in that thread after he complained about my comments regarding his absurdity:
"Why bother? Trying to have a discussion with you is futile and merely results in a long pretentious, condescending post from you droning on about how much you hate liberals. Reading about the same 5 talking points has grown exceptionally boring."

I'm sure the words "typical liberal" or "an expected liberal's reply" will pop up somewhere in his replies here.

[scottw]

guess it's getting tougher and tough to look in the mirror...hey JD...maybe he was just being sarcastic ?....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Took you this long?

Come on now, none of these gems did it for you:
"Liberals here want to blame conservatives for Ariz shooting?"
"Is Pelosi a liar or a lunatic?"
"From who did Obama "inherit" the economic mess?"
"Liberalism - let all the criminals go, it's not their fault"

The line for me was:
His attempt to correlate Indiana Medicaid denying a baby a transplant, which was due largely to the Republican Governor's budget cuts, with the Obama health care proposal at the time. Then to use that correlation to defend Palin's idiot Death Panel comments.

Like I said in that thread after he complained about my comments regarding his absurdity:
"Why bother? Trying to have a discussion with you is futile and merely results in a long pretentious, condescending post from you droning on about how much you hate liberals. Reading about the same 5 talking points has grown exceptionally boring."

I'm sure the words "typical liberal" or "an expected liberal's reply" will pop up somewhere in his replies here.

Hey Johnny D...if you're going to trash me, is it too much to ask that you trash me for things I actually said? I don't remember correlating the Indiand Medicaid and Palin's death panel comments.

So Johnny, if you think my question about Pelosi had no merit, can I assume that you do not think she was lying when she said that defecit reduction has been the mantra of Democrats? You think that was a truthful statement?

What's wrong with asking from whom did Obama inherit the economic mess? If Obama keeps saying again and again that he inherited this mess, what's wrong with asking from whom?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Welcome to my ignore list.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Eben, if you could have taken the time to point out why my opinion on this is without merit, that would have been better. I sincerely enjoy engaging with thoughtful folks who disagree with me...I relish that, because that's how you learn.

I did see your post on the other thread where you said, sarcastically, that you were "shocked" that the shooter was a member of the Tea Party. In my opinion, that was an unreasonable thing for you to say, and here's why...there is no evidence, none whatsoever, that the Tea Party supports the use of violence towards those with whom they disagree.

But you took the easy way out and insulted me, without supporting why you think my position is invalid. That says more about you than it does about me.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

there is no evidence, none whatsoever, that the Tea Party supports the use of violence towards those with whom they disagree.

Have you been to a Tea Party event? I attended one last year (kind of by accident initially) because I agree with a lot of the principles that the Tea Party was initially founded on. However, the hours I spent there and many of the people I met provided a direct contradiction to your above statement. There was a ton of hate spewed, not by those on the stage, but by many people in the crowd.

The public perception of political groups (well, just about all groups) are defined by the loudest and most extreme in their ranks.

• Democrats are defined by far-left social liberals
• Republicans are defined by far-right religious conservatives
• Pro-choice means you want to slaughter babies
• Pro-life means you'll blow up Planned Parenthood locations
• Being a fisherman means you'll kill anything and everything that comes by
• Being vegetarian means you hug trees
• Don't like Unions? You must hate the little guy
• Part of a Union? "Is it time for you to take a break yet?"

The same has happened to the Tea Party. The group that initially stood for decreased government and fiscal responsibility are now defined by these people:

because they are the loudest and most extreme of the bunch.


You are probably the most guilty one here for assumptions and then extreme accusations. For instance:

So Johnny, if you think my question about Pelosi had no merit, can I assume that you do not think she was lying when she said that defecit reduction has been the mantra of Democrats? You think that was a truthful statement?

We all know what happens when you assume... and for the record, Pelosi is high up there on my "Politicians You're Most Disgusted By" list.

Hey Johnny D...if you're going to trash me, is it too much to ask that you trash me for things I actually said?

You should take your own advice. Especially since, putting words in someone else's mouth (or twisting them until they are far removed from the original meaning) and then providing two paragraphs on how your fabrications of what they said is wrong, doesn't count as "trashing me for things I actually said".

Since you don't remember relating Indiana Medicaid denying a baby a transplant and using that to defend Palin:
http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...th-panels.html

[scottw]

that sign is clearly photoshopped...good grief?

I was there...there was no hate spewed till JD showed up and started insulting everyone for being inbred rednecks....

[Jim in CT]

Johnny D..

"The public perception of political groups (well, just about all groups) are defined by the loudest and most extreme in their ranks."

If the "public", and you, wants to define an entire group by the actions of its most extreme members, that's their (and your) problem, and it's stupid. Rational, thoughtful people (and I am arrogant enough to include myself in that group) do not do that.

I have been to many tea party events. Never heard any support of violence. Are there extremists? Yes. Do they speak for everyone? Nope.

"Pro-life means you'll blow up Planned Parenthood locations "

Anyone who think sthat is an idiot, they just are. I'm pro-life, which necessarily means that I condemn the acts of anyone who would bomb planned parenthood. I have seen the lefty media try to lump all of us in with the tiny handful of folks who have killed abortionists, and it's stupid and dishonest.

Johnny, you said you didn't like my question about whether or not Pelosi was a liar or a lunatic, yet you also won't admit that you think she was telling the truth. It's kind of hard to figure out what you're saying, other than you keep telling me I'm wrong...

on the death panels thread...Palin was villified for referring to death panels...then in this case, the gov't denies life-saving treatment to a kid. You say the kid died because of Republican cuts? That may well be true, I never said otherwise. Either way, the gov't made a decision not to help this kid, which to me is equivalent to a death panel. See, you assume that if you show that it was a Republican that caused this kid's death, you are proving me wrong. Unfortunately for you, that's not the case. I'm opposed to the govt making those decisions, regardless of the political party affiliation of the politician in question. Party has nothing to do with it. I want doctors and families making those decisions, not the government. Am I going too fast for you?

[PaulS]

I thought Jim jumped the shark when he commented on Pelosi's looks. I laughed that an actuary was actually talking about someone else's looks. It was the one of the funniest thing I've heard on here. The SOA meetings have more ungroomed people than any event I've ever been to.

[scottw]

I'm beginning to see Jim's point, some are quite quick to nitpick and even condemn what others say while taking little ownership of what they say, clearly not remembering what they've said and having little recognition of it's impact and even parroting some of the most incendiary rhetoric....

do as I say, not as I do..... lest I will insult you and then "ignore" you....

hey Jim...if they say it , it's "sarcasm"...if you say it...it's "hate speech"...see how it works?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

hey Jim...if they say it , it's "sarcasm"...if you say it...it's "hate speech"...see how it works?

Yes, that's precisely how it works, and they genuinely don't see anything wrong with it. Hence the mental disorder thing...

For God's sake, the investigating sheriff in Arizona (who you will be shocked to learn is a Democrat) said on Foxnews Sunday that right-wing hate speech incites this kind of violence. Of course, when the host asked him what evidence there was that this kook was inspired by right-wing propoganda, the guy said it's just his opinion.

I remember during the town hall meetings on healthcare, the labor unions sent goons to make sure that folks didn't get the chance to speak against Obamacare. I didn't see the lefties protesting that.

We all saw footage of the black panthers in Philadelphia standing outside voting booths in military clothes and holding clubs. The Democrats had nothing to say about that.

Allen Grayson (former Democratic congressman from Florida) caled his opponent "Taliban Dan", and only Foxnews spoke against it.

MSNBC claims that Foxnews condones "hate speech", and then calls millions of Americans "tea baggers". No one on the left sees any hypocrisy there. Fortunately, only 14 or 15 people watch it.

Yet when Sarah Palin uses the common political expression "battleground states", the left starts shrieking about hate speech designed to incite violence.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I thought Jim jumped the shark when he commented on Pelosi's looks. I laughed that an actuary was actually talking about someone else's looks. It was the one of the funniest thing I've heard on here. The SOA meetings have more ungroomed people than any event I've ever been to.

When did I do that?

It must be nice to debate others when you allow yourself to put words in the mouth of the other person that are made up.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

The SOA meetings have more ungroomed people than any event I've ever been to.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

When did I do that?

Different Jim I think.


While I have been repeatedly accused of being right wing on here, I really don't align myself with a wing. I watch the vitriol spittled from both sides and have for the last twenty years while I politically sway left or right abouts the center. I have seen many on the left turn into viscous fools, all the kooks are on the right, just as much as right shouts of the kooks on the left.

Are we really any better of this? Why are we so freikin' divided? We just mire ourselves down so deep and bring us all down.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Different Jim I think.


While I have been repeatedly accused of being right wing on here, I really don't align myself with a wing. I watch the vitriol spittled from both sides and have for the last twenty years while I politically sway left or right abouts the center. I have seen many on the left turn into viscous fools, all the kooks are on the right, just as much as right shouts of the kooks on the left.

Are we really any better of this? Why are we so freikin' divided? We just mire ourselves down so deep and bring us all down.

That's a great question John. We are more polarized in our differences than we were 20 years ago, and I am honest enough to include myself in that "we", I'm as guilty as anyone (although I like to think I list my reasons when I slam someone).

I cannot imagine how it gets any better. I'm part of the conservative movement that believes that small government, low taxes, fiscal responsibility, individual liberty, strong national defense, right to life, and personal responsibility are the correct ingredients for a better future for our kids. I believe those things to my core, and I see not a shred of credible evidence to the contrary.

People on the left believe differently (in some cases the exact opposite), and just as strongly. How do you bring people together who are so diametrically opposed? I haven't a clue. Part of the problem, I think, is that with the threats of Al Queda and the dire financial situation that local/state/federal gov't is in, more people feel like we're at the edge of a precipace, so our differences really come to the forefront, because we rightly feel a sense of urgency.

For the record, I am a "Casulty" actuary, not a life/health actuary (which is what the SOA governs). We are more handsome as a group, although lamentably, not in my case.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

How do you bring people together who are so diametrically opposed?

We could start by removing terms like Moonbat, Wingnut, Obamorons, Nazi, Tea-Baggers, and other derogatory names from the conversation.

Pretty sure that name calling doesn't lead to the free expression of ideas and open dialogue between people.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

When did I do that?

It must be nice to debate others when you allow yourself to put words in the mouth of the other person that are made up.

If you didn't say that, then I'll apologize. When I see insults in the first post, I usually just ignore the thread.

[Nebe]

No one can sway anyone on these boards. It's a complete waste of energy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Raven]

Originally Posted by Nebe

No one can sway anyone on these boards. It's a complete waste of energy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spoken like the MARVELOUS free thinker you are....

there are double rainbows hidden within those words

Blame has to fall on the Parents, the school officials and others whose job it was to see that this troubled kid had serious issues
that everyone turned a blind eye to and did nothing but ignore him.

[scottw]

MSNBC Analyst on Shooting: Media Has ‘Behaved Pretty Well,’ but not Conservatives

January 11, 2011 at 8:00am by Jonathon M. Seidl
On Tuesday morning’s “Morning Joe,“ MSNBC political analyst Mark Halperin summarized the recent response to the Arizona tragedy with the audacious claim that politicians and the media ”behaved pretty well.” But with one caveat: the “good behavior” can’t be extended to conservative commentators.

“I just want to single out one thing,” Halperin said. “I don’t want to over-generalize but I think the media and the politicians have behaved pretty well so far. The thing I’m most concerned about now is the anger on the right-wing commenatariat: on Fox, and George Will, and other conservatives are, in some cases justifiably upset at liberals. But they’re turning this right now, in the last 24 hours, back into the standard operating procedure of all of this is war and fodder for content, rather than trying to bring the country together.”

That caused host Joe Scarborough to do a double take: “Wait a second, Mark. I think they would say that you have that backwards. That a shooting was turned into fodder to attack conservatives.”

Halperin reached into the biblical analogy bag to respond. Conservatives, he said, just should have turned the other cheek: “They’re right. But rather than seizing on it and turning the other cheek, they are back at their war stations. And that’s not going to help us.”

this is war Mr. Halperin, your side launched the SCUD missiles and now you hide behind skirts and the Bible?....We understand that people like you are no different than the islamofacists who play by no moral or ethical rules and demand that your victims adhere to stringent guidelines as you continue to stoop to every form of dispicable attack....

NY TIMES EDITORS
It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people.

there are two sides angry at government...those that are angry about what the government is doing to them and those that are angry about what the government isn't doing for them, clearly the Journalists and Editors at the paper of shame have decided that the rhetoric is only a problem from one side and apparently of these people have chosen to ingnore the evidence from people that say they knew this guy and have described him as pothead, left wing, anti-religeon and who know's what the shrine with the skull in his yard was all about but there isn't a single link to anything teaparty, conservative, rightwing, talk radio, Palin etc...still they persist and make it very clear that there is absolutely no debate with theses people...no shame, no consience, no integrity and no principles....

Obama fires up Democrats: 'I want you to argue with them and get in their face'THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Thursday, September 18th 2008, 9:50 AM

.........................

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by scottw

[Obama fires up Democrats: 'I want you to argue with them and get in their face'THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Thursday, September 18th 2008, 9:50 AM

.........................

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night.

and lets not forget -
"But they're going to be paying attention to this election, and if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, "We're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us ."If they don't see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it's gonna be harder. And that's why I think it is so important that people focus on voting on November 2.

direct quote from our President.
Who is inciting violence?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

and lets not forget -
"But they're going to be paying attention to this election, and if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, "We're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us ."If they don't see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it's gonna be harder. And that's why I think it is so important that people focus on voting on November 2.

direct quote from our President.
Who is inciting violence?

Great post, right on point, and it absolutely refutes the notion that only right-wingers use hate speech. Of course, the fact that you have proven that claim to be false, will not stop some (not all, but too manu) on the left from continuing to make that claim. See, there's that mental disorder thing.

Here is a quote from an editorial in today's Hartford Courant, where the editors essentially think right wing discussion is an accessory to these mass murders...

"“But the left is not the location of extremism today. Radical political disaffection, racism, separatism and the rhetoric of violence are now the currency of the extreme right”

This was not a letter to the editor...it was an editorial. Unbelievable. I know I have caught flak for saying liberalism is a mental disorder. But if you genuinely believe that people like Limbaugh and Palin are even remotely responsible for this tragedy, you are not right in the head. If you genuinely believe that hate speech doesn't exist on the left, you have a screw loose.

[fishpoopoo]

Originally Posted by Nebe

No one can sway anyone on these boards. It's a complete waste of energy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

whut?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by fishpoopoo

whut?

THANK YOU!!!

[buckman]

Originally Posted by fishpoopoo

whut?

What the hell were we talking about????

[striperman36]

Originally Posted by fishpoopoo

whut?

Somebody say something about extended?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by fishpoopoo

whut?

yes, rock bottom and big guns

[scottw]

we need more politicians like President Obama, he of the famous middle finger who refers to his opponents as "hostage takers" and "enemies" who need to be "punished", who accuses the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly and then thanks the Sherrif in Arizona who is acting stupidly, who vows to bring a gun to the fight and implores his followers to get in people's faces and yell at them, who's former chief of staff once stabbed a table with a steak knife repeatedly, listing the names of his political enemies and shouting "dead...dead...dead" ....yes, we need more people like this to assume the high ground and call for civility and common decency...they've built so much credability along the way....I'm guessing the call for calm won't last long because Barry doesn't like it when he doesn't get his way and he can't resist a cheap shot or an opportunity to lob a (rhetorical)bomb....

[fishpoopoo]

Originally Posted by scottw

big guns

[scottw]

what Obama should have done/said....

the problem with a lecture from a habitual offender is that is often met with appropriate skeptecism....

btw...the behaviour of the crowd at this "memorial" was really questionable from what I've read...Obama gave a stirring speech to a crowd that didn't quite know how to act appropriately in the moment...reminds me of the Paul Wellstone memorial which was turned into an exuberant political rally....ewwwww

anyway, if Obama truly wanted to set a better course for the next two years and recognizing that it may be a rocky road and needing to, as president, assume the mantle of leader going forward he should have begun with himself...

" recognizing that this event was not necessarily the result of heated political discourse but also acknowledging that the aftermath has been a sort of "wake up call" and has shown a level of tension exists that is not at all healthy for a great nation in difficult times and also realizing that I myself, have contributed to the degradation of the political debate though language and action that does not serve to further the conversation, as President, I pledge to, for the next two years, chose my words more carefully and use only language that reflects positively on the Office of the President of the United States and I will seek to lead by example and be accountable to the people that I am fortunate to serve, , I will ask those that I have influence over to do the same and I implore the members of Congress, media and the American public to do so for the good of our Nation."

always good to start with yourself...then work out one occasion, given the point being made..that "I" would have been appropriate, appreciated and probably brilliant...

I'd have a lot of respect for someone that said "I'm guilty too, but watch me lead by example"

oh, Spence...be gentle..I don't have a speech writer or a teleprompter from which to read