Topic: Have you heard about...? (Politics edition)

[nab]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods. 

[mbw]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods.

really?  get on target against his opponent....come shoot fully automatic m16's?  you dont see threatening language in that, designed to intimidate her???

[nab]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods.

really?  get on target against his opponent....come shoot fully automatic m16's?  you dont see threatening language in that???

If I really want it to fit what I want it to say, I can read anything into that.

[Poster Nutbag]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods.

I'll take your post with a grain of sarcastic salt, but some people may just read into that statement or event as it has deeper meaning, than just discard it due to its lack of punctuation. Besides anyone that is stupid enough to believe anything Sarah Palin spews out her mouth, probably is just barely literate enough to read. 

[mbw]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods.

really?  get on target against his opponent....come shoot fully automatic m16's?  you dont see threatening language in that???

If I really want it to fit what I want it to say, I can read anything into that.

please.  what if you want it to say, "come have meaningful discourse on the state of arizona poilitics"
can you read that?

[nab]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods.

really?  get on target against his opponent....come shoot fully automatic m16's?  you dont see threatening language in that???

If I really want it to fit what I want it to say, I can read anything into that.

please.  what if you want it to say, "come have meaningful discourse on the state of arizona poilitics"
can you read that?

Where did you pull the quote from anyway?  I just tried to get into the SarahPac page for that day via the wayback machine and wasn't able to access that page. 

[mbw]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods.

really?  get on target against his opponent....come shoot fully automatic m16's?  you dont see threatening language in that???

If I really want it to fit what I want it to say, I can read anything into that.

please.  what if you want it to say, "come have meaningful discourse on the state of arizona poilitics"
can you read that?

Where did you pull the quote from anyway?  I just tried to get into the SarahPac page for that day via the wayback machine and wasn't able to access that page.

oh course you werent, cause she is actively scrubbing everything that has to do with guns and opponents.  "dont retreat, reload!"  etc.  that image from kelly's website is all over the internet, it would be hard not to find it.

[nab]

I think using a

it might be a little provocative for you, phil, but there are conversations that need to be had along w/ the candle light vigils.

Like:

Where do we have, in this guy's words, the admission that this was a politically motivated act based on some inspiration he garnered from a prominent right wing figurehead?


Has this come to light? (Serious question here)


Or,
Is the left just having a field day with suppositions and causation, and doing exactly what phil is suggesting Moore is doing?

i believe its more a commentary on the tone of politics right now on.  SP continually uses gun metaphors, as did giffords opponent jesse kelly:



whether or not this deranged person was a follower of either isn't the issue.  he clearly had issues with the  government and used a gun to make his point. 

the point of moore and others pointing this out is that this type of lexicon has no place in politics and has real, horrible consequences.

How does that quote advocate anything but bad sentence structure and disregard for periods.

really?  get on target against his opponent....come shoot fully automatic m16's?  you dont see threatening language in that???

If I really want it to fit what I want it to say, I can read anything into that.

please.  what if you want it to say, "come have meaningful discourse on the state of arizona poilitics"
can you read that?

Where did you pull the quote from anyway?  I just tried to get into the SarahPac page for that day via the wayback machine and wasn't able to access that page.

oh course you werent, cause she is actively scrubbing everything that has to do with guns and opponents.  "dont retreat, reload!"  etc.  that image from kelly's website is all over the internet, it would be hard not to find it.

Where did you pull the image from? 

[PG]

Honestly the shoot to kill rhetoric of the Palins and Becks of the world serve no positive purpose. Let's talk about politics and voting and even marching and participating in the process all day long. That's what this country is all about. In no way should we be putting Palin in prison for the words and images on her site (though Moore perhaps has a point about a Muslim posting the same thing probably being in custody right now). But there have been people pointing out that the violent rhetoric will probably lead to some crazy a-hole bringing a fucking machine gun to a rally for a long time. It is 100% the right thing to do to call attention to that rhetoric at a time like this. The Palins and Becks of the world do not get to deny the connection.  No way no how.

[mbw]

that actual link was from here:
http://firedoglake.com/2011/01/08/giffords-opponent-jesse-kelly-held-june-event-to-shoot-a-fully-automatic-m16-to-get-on-target-and-remove-gabrielle-giffords/

but like i said, its literally all over the internet.

[nab]

Honestly the shoot to kill rhetoric of the Palins and Becks of the world serve no positive purpose. Let's talk about politics and voting and even marching and participating in the process all day long. That's what this country is all about. In no way should we be putting Palin in prison for the words and images on her site (though Moore perhaps has a point about a Muslim posting the same thing probably being in custody right now). But there have been people pointing out that the violent rhetoric will probably lead to some crazy a-hole bringing a fucking machine gun to a rally for a long time. It is 100% the right thing to do to call attention to that rhetoric at a time like this. The Palins and Becks of the world do not get to deny the connection.  No way no how.

I agree with most of this, but using an event to point out how someone, especially someone without a proven connection to the event should be silenced is treading on dangerous territory to me.

I honestly don't know who I fear more at this point; the crazy right wing mouthpieces who advocate revolution, or the crazy left wing wackos that advocate stiffing speech (I'll cue the "fire in the theater" argument for anyone here just to get it out of the way).

[PG]

That's why I said that in no way does Palin belong in prison for words or images on her site. I will defend anybody's right to use words. But they have to be taken to task for those words. Nobody should find this rhetoric acceptable. This is where I think Olberman is right. The leadership of the r Republican party should repudiate the violent rhetoric. Bhoener should hold a press conference and call for an end to violent rhetoric.   

[nab]

that actual link was from here:
http://firedoglake.com/2011/01/08/giffords-opponent-jesse-kelly-held-june-event-to-shoot-a-fully-automatic-m16-to-get-on-target-and-remove-gabrielle-giffords/

but like i said, its literally all over the internet.

Well, its a blog that makes a very convincing argument. 

People can read into things all they want.  Charlie Manson admitted to being inspired by portions of the White Album, this is especially concerning considering the fact that the Beatles advocated themes of partner abuse/murder (Run For Your Life), vigilante justice (Rocky Raccoon), and drug hookups (Dr. Roberts), in other songs.

[PG]

Another person smarter than me making my point... this from

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/2011/01/judging-from-his-internet-postings.html

It Doesn’t Matter Why He Did It
Posted by George Packer

Judging from his Internet postings, Jared Lee Loughner is a delusional young man whose inner political landscape is a swamp of dystopian novels, left- and right-wing tracts, conspiracy theories, and contempt for his fellow human beings. He refers to the gold and silver standard; that doesn't make Ron Paul responsible for the shootings. He is fond of “Animal Farm”; George Orwell didn't guide the hand that pulled the automatic pistol's trigger. Marx and Hitler produced a lot of corpses, but not the ones in Tucson.

But the plate-glass window of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords’s office was shattered last March after the final health-care vote. Judge John Roll, who was among the dead, had received death threats and spent a month with a protection detail. Roll was apparently a bystander to Loughner’s intended target—and maybe the gunman had no idea why he was aiming for Giffords either, maybe he didn't know how she voted on health care or what her position on Arizona’s draconian immigration law was. It would be a kind of relief if Loughner operated not out of any coherent political context but just his own fevered brain.

But even so, the tragedy wouldn't change this basic fact: for the past two years, many conservative leaders, activists, and media figures have made a habit of trying to delegitimize their political opponents. Not just arguing against their opponents, but doing everything possible to turn them into enemies of the country and cast them out beyond the pale. Instead of “soft on defense,” one routinely hears the words “treason” and “traitor.” The President isn't a big-government liberal—he's a socialist who wants to impose tyranny. He's also, according to a minority of Republicans, including elected officials, an impostor. Even the reading of the Constitution on the first day of the 112th Congress was conceived as an assault on the legitimacy of the Democratic Administration and Congress.

This relentlessly hostile rhetoric has become standard issue on the right. (On the left it appears in anonymous comment threads, not congressional speeches and national T.V. programs.) And it has gone almost entirely uncriticized by Republican leaders. Partisan media encourages it, while the mainstream media finds it titillating and airs it, often without comment, so that the gradual effect is to desensitize even people to whom the rhetoric is repellent. We’ve all grown so used to it over the past couple of years that it took the shock of an assassination attempt to show us the ugliness to which our politics has sunk.

The massacre in Tucson is, in a sense, irrelevant to the important point. Whatever drove Jared Lee Loughner, America's political frequencies are full of violent static.

[mehead]

That's why I said that in no way does Palin belong in prison for words or images on her site. I will defend anybody's right to use words. But they have to be taken to task for those words. Nobody should find this rhetoric acceptable. This is where I think Olberman is right. The leadership of the r Republican party should repudiate the violent rhetoric. Bhoener should hold a press conference and call for an end to violent rhetoric.

while you are corerct, this should not be a Republican/Democrat, left/right debate.  Blaming one side or the other gets this country nowhere and certainly doesn't stop the violence