jump to last post 1-50 of 94 discussions (652 posts)

Stop blaming guns and Palin for the Arizona shooting.

  1. 60
    LBModposted 5 years ago

    The tragedy this past week in Arizona has drummed up all sorts of emotions and fears in the American public as well it should. What happened to the victims of that heinous act of senseless violence is horrifying, some might say unacceptable. And while I’m sure we can all agree that it was horrifying, the only thing I find unacceptable about it is the reaction of the people who are making opportunistic political power plays preying on the very real fears of the public in the wake of the shooting.
    Now, I am in no way admonishing the monster that committed this act, but you cannot legislate against crazy and that is exactly what Jared Loughner is. Just a cook who lost it, slipped through the cracks and snapped. I can understand that, we’ve seen it enough times throughout history to know that it happens and will happen again. But I do not understand the people who are blaming the 2nd Amendment and Sarah Palin for this. They are despicable for using this tragedy as a platform to spew the very political rhetoric that they say sparked the powder keg that was Loughner’s deranged mind in the first place (even though we are learning that that is not the case). It’s just another example of how a lot of people in this country just don’t get it and can’t face reality or concoct these blame games because they are afraid of it.
    And before anyone reading this tries to peg my political beliefs by the previous paragraph, let me tell you that I am a registered Democrat who voted for Obama, has never even touched a gun let alone owned one, and believes that Sarah Palin shouldn’t even be given the time of day by our supposed informed electorate. But unlike most people who share my political beliefs, common sense took over when looking at the events in Tucson.
    Face it America, as much as it might help you sleep at night, the fact that Jared Loughner was able to do this is not the fault of the 2nd Amendment. If guns were illegal in Arizona he still would’ve gotten his hands on one. Just ask people in Chicago where side by side reside some of our nation’s strictest gun control laws and one of our nation’s highest rates of gun violence. Making guns illegal won’t end the problem. And I find Sarah Palin as distasteful and anyone can, I personally despise the woman and her politics, but nothing she said drove this man to kill, people close to Loughner are starting to provide that information but I doubt it will stop the people looking to pin it on her.
    This is not to say that the political climate in America today isn’t appalling. It is, and big, real, tangible change is needed. No politician seems to be remotely interested in anything other than bashing the other side these days and it is spinning out of control. But the change should be done because it is the right thing to do for the people, not as a way to push your side’s agenda and ride the wave of fear that inevitably follows tragedy, or as a knee-jerk reaction to said tragedy.
    Crazy people are going to do crazy things and there’s nothing we can do about it. It was happening before politics, it was happening before guns, and it was even happening before Sarah Palin.

    1. Stump Parrish profile image60
      Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No.I  Can't stop, and don't want to.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Thank you stump! Me neither.

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
          Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          The human is what turns the gun from a beneficial tool to a symbol of hatred.

          Not the other way around.

      2. Marquis profile image60
        Marquisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, but he was a left wing psycho-

    2. Jeff Berndt profile image92
      Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      methinks thou dost protest too much.

      1. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Because no one should ever defend the right to speak...

    3. oceansnsunsets profile image89
      oceansnsunsetsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      We have seen a LOT about the level of integrity of those that would blame this leftist, Marxist (known leftist and Marxist) man's behavior onto Palin or the Tea Party or on conservatives.  That makes NO sense whatsoever, except to shed light on how low some will go. 

      Kudos to those Liberals (I saw one guy, so have to say good for him!) that was saying that liberals are acting stupid that were doing that.

      When people have to act in the nasty ways we see, and use that level of poor thinking, it hurts them, and actually can give more credence to what the other side has been saying. 

      They should stop, and apologize.  That deranged shooter was as left as Obama,and a Marxist, more "left" than the lady he was trying to shoot. 
      This is what truly concerns me (in part) about this country.  Its as if people are embracing sheer stupidity and craziness and don't even care what they look like doing so.  This hurts truth and makes a mockery of things. 
      This horrific tragedy is bad enough, and innocent people died.  This is how many libs respond, even on tv?  It reinforces what I knew was true already, but alarms me how bad it is getting. 

      People, on all sides, should care about the truths of matters, facts and Logic.  Consider your sources to be lame if you are just being a copycat and spewing the same stuff.

      1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
        Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        "People, on all sides, should care about the truths of matters, facts and Logic."

        Yes, they absolutely should.

        "This horrific tragedy is bad enough, and innocent people died."

        Indeed, it's reprehensible that people should use this guy to make their political opponents look bad by association.

        "That deranged shooter was as left as Obama,and a Marxist, more "left" than the lady he was trying to shoot."

        Oh, well, I suppose that expecting you to practice what you're preaching would be too much.

        The guy's favorite books list is all over the place, including not only the Communist Manifesto (left wing), but also Mein Kampf (right wing) and The Phantom Tollbooth (??). I doubt the shooter had a clear idea about what he believed, politically. But sure, go ahead and paint him as a leftist. It fits your narrative a lot better.

  2. getitrite profile image80
    getitriteposted 5 years ago

    Didn't the OP just write a hub about this?  Forums should have short introductions, not the whole hub.

    As for your question:  Well maybe Sarah Palin is not the blame for the shooting.  Maybe this was just the work of a severely mentally ill young man.

    But I'm pretty sure Palin's political career is done.  I feel almost sorry for her, because she really believes that she is relevant. 

    After her response to the allegations, she took a bad situation, and made it so much worse.  Why?  Just her sheer ignorance and consistent bumbling while in front of a camera.

    Conservatives will probably not come to her defense, in fact, the republican presidential hopefuls might even start stating their oppositions to her.

    1. Stump Parrish profile image60
      Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      She has the Fox News Network behind her and I think she'll be around for awhile longer. I really hope they run her for president in 2012. Could they be that crazy?

      1. getitrite profile image80
        getitriteposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        That WOULD be crazy.

      2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image95
        Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Stump, your not thinking this through!  THINK OF ALL THE SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE FUN WE COULD HAVE!!!!!!!!!!

    2. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      People have been prediction the career of Palin is going to be "over" starting five minutes after she was nominated for VP. Your track record is not looking too hot right now.

      1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
        Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I'm hoping for a Palin presidential bid.

        1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image95
          Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Me too!  Laughter is good medicine, and since I can't afford wealthcare, laughing at Palin all day will be the best contribution that capitalism has made for the collective health of the nation!

    3. Marquis profile image60
      Marquisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      She has more going for her than comrade President Obama does.

  3. Mikeydoes profile image80
    Mikeydoesposted 5 years ago

    The kid was crazy. Period.

    1. Stump Parrish profile image60
      Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Mikey, that's not being disputed. The local sheriff who watched the same tv as the shooter stated that the violent rhetoric has contributed to the problem with violence in his city. How do people who have never been to the city know more about whats going on in that city? They don't they take the word of those the choose to believe and take off on a rantpage. Cool I just invented a word. Rantpage...a verbal rampage.

      Nothing convinces the masses like a lack of personal knowledge or experience.

      1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
        Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        "Cool I just invented a word. Rantpage...a verbal rampage."
        I 'refudiate' your new word! smile

    2. tritrain profile image77
      tritrainposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      That sums it up for me!

  4. skyfire profile image72
    skyfireposted 5 years ago

    Blame Obama. Never ever ever blame palin, it's against bible.

    1. lady_love158 profile image61
      lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Why would anyone blame Obama for this or Palin for that matter? Or even guns? Where is the evidence for this blame?

      1. h.a.borcich profile image61
        h.a.borcichposted 5 years ago in reply to this



          May I offer this little tidbit: If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars drive drunk, and spoons make people fat.
          Looking for someone to blame? Perhaps the shooter is responsible.

        1. Neil Sperling profile image89
          Neil Sperlingposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I like tour thinking

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            ...just another mind numbed robot, eh.

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image68
          Ralph Deedsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Of course the shooter is responsible, but so is the NRA and our legislators who have failed to pass common sense laws controlling gun manufacture, sale, ownership and use.

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Ralph has been asked multiple times on various Hub topics over the years to actually give some gun control laws that...

            1) Work...

            2) Do not take away freedoms from Americans by first assuming that they are no different from a criminal.

            He has never, ever once, in spite of repeated requests, actually given those "common sense" laws he keeps asking for.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
              Ralph Deedsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              1. Reinstate assault weapons ban.
              2. Make large capacity magazines illegal to manufacture, import or sell for other than military use.
              3. Prohibit weapons of any type in schools, courthouses, political events, art fairs, etc.
              4. Tighten up on gun show sales, records, background checks.
              5. Prohibit gun ownership by mentally ill individuals.
              6. Strictly limit sale, ownership and registration of handguns.

              I haven't studied the issue. I'm sure there are other steps that could be taken.

              1. Jack Burton profile image81
                Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                [1. Reinstate assault weapons ban.]

                Even the brady bunch now admits that the so-call assualt weapons ban did nothing effective. You're behind the curve on this one, ralph. But it does give me an excuse to remind people that if they google "jack burton" and "evil black rifles" they'll find my hubpage on the issue and can learn more in five minutes than you've learned in a lifetime about them. Thank you.

                BTW... one of the conditions was that it would "work." The other was that it wouldn't limit the freedom of citizens by treating them as criminals. You fail on both these.

                [2. Make large capacity magazines illegal to manufacture, import or sell for other than military use.]

                One of the conditions was that it would "work." The other was that it wouldn't limit the freedom of citizens by treating them as criminals. You fail on both these.

                Millions of large capacity magazines in citizens hands today. Because a few are misused each year you think that that gives reason to "ban" the couple million that are not. This is liberal thinking at it's very best.

                [3. Prohibit weapons of any type in schools, courthouses, political events, art fairs, etc.]

                That will certainly, beyound the shadow of a doubt, keep people from doing harm to others. That person with a gun who sees your "guns prohibitted" sign will just turn around and say, "Dang, I really wanted to murder people today but I can't 'cause I can't take my gun in there."

                Or... perhaps, and this is much more reasonable, he is going to say, "Wow.. .NO ONE in there can possibly interfere with what I am planning. Thanks, Ralph."

                One of the conditions was that it would "work." The other was that it wouldn't limit the freedom of citizens by treating them as criminals. You fail on both these.

                [4. Tighten up on gun show sales, records, background checks.]

                Every gun show sale by every seller and every gun show buy has local, state, and federal laws firearm laws  that are followed. There is no "tighter" unless you want to do away with gun shows.

                One of the conditions was that it would "work." The other was that it wouldn't limit the freedom of citizens by treating them as criminals. You fail on both these.

                [5. Prohibit gun ownership by mentally ill individuals.]

                Well, Ralph, it is ALREADY against the law for mentally ill individuals to purchase firearms. I guess we can make it "doubly illegal" if you want. (I have a real good feeling that Ralph's ultimate definiton of "mentally ill people" is "people who disagree with Ralph.")

                One of the conditions was that it would "work." The other was that it wouldn't limit the freedom of citizens by treating them as criminals. You fail on both these.

                [6. Strictly limit sale, ownership and registration of handguns.]

                Err.... it IS strictly limited.

                One of the conditions was that it would "work." The other was that it wouldn't limit the freedom of citizens by treating them as criminals. You fail on both these.

                [I haven't studied the issue. I'm sure there are other steps that could be taken.]

                You haven't STUDIED the issue? Ralph, every topic you get on including the ones on how to bake cakes you eventually get around to whining about needing common sense gun laws. And NOW you tell us you haven't studied the issue. Somehow we knew that in advance.

                1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
                  Ralph Deedsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  What's your position? No controls on guns can be effective? If not what do you believe would be reasonable, commonsense gun regulations consistent with the Second Amendment?

                  1. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Well, for starters, MISUSE of a gun to harm someone would be illegal. But not special. I don't believe that killing someone with a gun should get ten years tacked on to the sentence when killing someone with a knife doesn't. The person is equally dead with a grieving family either way.

                    Secondly, and as with the 1st Amendment, prior restraint is not constitutionally acceptable. We don't put gags in peoples mouth based upon what they "might" say... we don't take typewriters or computer printers away from people based upon what they "might" print. We should have no gun laws based upon what people "might" do.

                    Third... if someone is has been adjudicated as "dangerous" to the community then act as if it is serious. Either he is... or he isn't. If he is... then why is he out roaming around innocent people. [Note (because I know someone is going to purposefully misunderstand this... I am speaking of people who have been thru the court system and have been found judged guilty. Not someone who someone else just doesn't like for whatever reason.]

          2. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            If the crazy person had tossed a Molotov cocktail into the situation we can just see ralph blaming "...Shell gas stations and our legislators who have failed to pass common sense laws controlling gasoline manufacture, sale and ownership.

          3. Ron Montgomery profile image61
            Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this
          4. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image95
            Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            . . . .damn those founding fathers, and all of their wisdom!  Didn't they know that global government requires disarming the populace?  The media is the wheel that greases all the wheels in America; and the media is to blame for gun violence; but I like it when people blame guns; cause inanimate objects, soul less as they are, are inherently evil!

            1. Pcunix profile image90
              Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Damn those conservatives who think every liberal is anti-gun.

              A lot of us are not.  I doubt you have any reason to worry: the percentage of people who would strip us of gun ownership is very small.

  5. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    I think Palin's chances as a GOP presidential candidate are dead. Maybe the Tea Party will run her.

    1. Stump Parrish profile image60
      Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Almost all the GOP presidential hopefuls work for Fox News with Palin. She's not going anywhere until Murrdock says so. As an employee of Fox news, I am sure she is bound by the same instructions all fox news employees receive as to what is permissable to report on and the proper take that is to be pushed that day. My point here is this, anything coming from her mouth as a representative of fox news would require prior approval. How can an organization keep making the same mistakes over and over again? There has to be someone on that staff that is thinking "what is it going to take to silence the outright stupidity? I'll tell ya, the coy little wink and smile got old the first week, dontcha know? She has yet to show me she has anything else to offer anyone who doesn't sleep with a gun, or drink the tea.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image21
        Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I would not want her anywhere near a single nuclear red button.

        1. Stump Parrish profile image60
          Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I know, she would probably launch an attack against the country of Africa

          1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image95
            Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      2. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        And Fox also tells Mara Liason what to say? And all the other liberals that appear regularly?

        I'll say it again because it never gets old... ~this~ is the very best the libs can offer us.

    2. 61
      C.J. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I would hope not. The Tea Party isn't dead by a long shot. We don't need her splitting the vote. She is still popular with male independents. I don't think either party would like loosing votes to her. She is NOT a viable candidate and people need to quit making her the political topic of the day. If she has an upside it's this: Love her or hate her, she gets you thinking. She gets you riled up. She's a voice in the wilderness, not a viable candidate.

    3. Jeff Berndt profile image92
      Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, pleeeease let the Tea Part run her....

    4. 0
      SirDentposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I disagree.  She is now, no doubt, an underdog.  She is practically crucified by liberals.  America loves the underdog.

      1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
        uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The more Palin is slapped the more popular she will become.  Those most critical of her are those whose opinions matter most to their own little closed circle and not a wit to conservatives and many independents.  We shall see, but I think her stock is rising not falling.

      2. Randy Godwin profile image94
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Not this one, Sir!  She is one dog that will never get out from under the porch.  smile

        1. 0
          SirDentposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You may be right, but I still disagree.  She is actually gaining in popularity from what I have seen.

        2. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Don't give up your day job to take one as a political pundit...

          "Americans View Sarah Palin as more Sincere and Believable after Watching Speech"

          http://mediacurves.com/Politics/SarahPa … /Index.cfm

          1. Doug Hughes profile image60
            Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            If you reference a real scientific (Post-ABC) poll from December..

            "Six in 10 voters say they would not even consider voting for the former Alaska governor if she launches a White House bid, and she loses badly to President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 general election test...

            A slim 8 percent of all registered voters say they would definitely vote for Palin for president, while 31 percent say they would consider doing so. Fully 60 percent say they definitely would not. Among all Americans, 59 percent say they would not vote for her, up from 53 percent in November 2009."

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 01512.html

            All I can say is - PLEASE run her in 2012. After that, hopefully she will go away and take the Tea Party with her.

  6. kirstenblog profile image78
    kirstenblogposted 5 years ago

    I think there is a certain amount of desire to see social responsibility here. The political division is getting old and really is a diversion from having to do any real work on the problem. I can tell you from personal experience that the mental health system is in shambles. The mentally ill are often caught in a revolving door system because no one wants to take care of them, take responsibility for them. I personally have in my past suffered from real depression and have more then once taken too many pills. On more then one occasion I had my stomach pumped and then was set back out to do it again, basically was back in the hospital the very next day. If my problems had been of a different nature I could have been a danger to others and that would have been in some regards worse. Point is we have a system that is failing us, we take no collective social responsibility for the kids who grew up abused (like me, I was just a cash cow to the lawyers who drew the case out as long as they could, my personal welfare was of no consequence in comparison to the money being made. Social responsibility is lacking and nothing is going to get any better if we cannot recognize the need for social responsibility.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Personal responsibility is lacking and nothing is going to get any better if we cannot recognize the need for personal responsibility.

  7. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago

    So who is blaming Palin?

    A quote to support the premise, please. Om this site the librals have been pretty clear. I have repeated that the shootings were done by a nut. I have talked about Palin and the Tea Party in the context of violent talk, threats and campaigning on violence. I used real quotes from candidates, not athletes to support my criticism.

    No one is blaming guns. But the shooter managed to hit twenty people and kill six withut reloading. Thre is a legitimate question if 30-shot clips should be legal. No one on this forum has called for a ban on guns.

    1. 2besure profile image83
      2besureposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I don't think a 30 clip shot should be legal except for the armed service where they might not be able to reload when necessary.

      1. lady_love158 profile image61
        lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        For 80 years the government has passed laws and spent countless billions of dollars to keep drugs out of people's hands, and how well has that worked? Even maximum security prisoners get drugs, and certainly they don't have a problem killing someone if they want to.

        Restricting guns only makes good citizens, defenseless and empowers the violent criminals that have no regard for law, order, or society.

        This effort to "control" guns has nothing at all to do with saving lives, it's about disarming the potential resistance!

      2. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        How about when a citizen is "unable to reload" that quickly? Why do you hate your fellow citizens so much that you are willing to leave them at the mercy of a large mob with only a few rounds that they can use to defend themselves with?

  8. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    She scares the crap out of me that we in America have to be afriad of being shot because we don't follow some one elses politics.

    Those Republicans quit because of the threat from the Tea-Party...does that say NOTHING to you????

    "Joyce Kaufman: The Ballot Box or The Cartridge Box." : you-tube



    Where are these people coming from? Seriously....Where do they get off acting like we who elected Obama are lesser citizens?

    Your candidate, or die? WTH?

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      "She scares the crap out of me that we in America have to be afriad of being shot because we don't follow some one elses politics."

      Yeah... just like that republican office holder who said about a governor candidate he didn't like..."Instead of running for governor, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him."

      Oh... wait... that was a DEMOCRAT representative who just said that a few months ago. My bad...

      http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/bel … and-shot-n

  9. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Loughner, "Has the full support of the Democrat party."--Russssshhhhhhh Limbaugh

    1. lady_love158 profile image61
      lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I think the left has demonstrated that view as valid since they have continued to blame the right for his actions. They have excused him for the shooting, essentially saying, it's not his fault, he was driven to it by the hate speech of the right and of Sarah Palin... that's the left that's how they roll and they started 2 hours after the shooting and haven't quit.

      1. Stump Parrish profile image60
        Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Who excused the shooter and where did you get this idea lady? A lot of circumstances came together to create this tragedy. Do you honestly believe that you know more about what happened than the sheriff of the town? Why do you continue with the additiude that nothing done by your beloved right is ever wrong? If you refuse to see how Palin's actions that were approved by those in control of her campaign

        1. Stump Parrish profile image60
          Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          contributed to the situation, there is little hope you will ever see anything that doesn't appear on Fox news. I am still waiting for you to prove one of the lies broadcast as truth by the Faux News Network. I see you chose to ignore questions when you can't come up with a legitimate answer.

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            There was a standing offer for years of $10,000 for anyone who was able to prove a single "lie" in Fox News broadcasts. No one even came forward to try to claim it. But when YOUR definition of a "lie" is "something I disagree politically with" then it's really easy to see why you think Fox is lying.

            1. Pcunix profile image90
              Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Perhaps you could explain why they went to court to claim the right to lie, then?

              No, never mind. You'll evade that, I'm sure.

              1. Jack Burton profile image81
                Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Perhaps you could actually post something that has information in it. But then again... you really can't, can you.

                1. Pcunix profile image90
                  Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  No?

                  http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&s … ght+to+lie

                  But of course none of that really happened in your fantasy world.

                  1. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Took about ten seconds to debunk your fantasy. Too bad...

                    ******************************************
                    It is clear from the evidence presented here that FOX did not argue, as claimed by several of its critics, that it had a First Amendment to lie in its news reports. It's also plain that the Florida courts did not rule that FOX and other broadcasters had such a right.

                    It would be nice to hope that this analysis will finally put to rest the myth of a First Amendment "right to lie" case involving FOX News. Nice, but probably unrealistic. At the very least, it should give ammunition to those intent on countering this particular wild internet rumor.
                    *******************************************

                    http://www.campaignfreedom.org/blog/det … ernet-myth

                    But you'll be out peddling the same trash next week, eh. But we've got your number now.

        2. lady_love158 profile image61
          lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          The sheriff of Pina county is an idiot! He should be fired! He knew about death threats made against Gifford's and did NOTHING to protect her! He knew about death threats by the shooter and did NOTHING! And you (the left) continue to demonize Palin and blame her without a single shred of evidence! The sheriff admitted on national TV that he had NO EVIDENCE to support his claims and that they were merely his opinions!

          1. Stump Parrish profile image60
            Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            You base your opinion of this sherriff on what? this man was front and center as this situation developed and you know for a fact that you know more about what happened there than he does, right? No he says something you and Fox news disgree with and that is what makes him an idiot. It is becoming obvious that you would know the truth if it snuck up and tapped you on the shoulder with cross hairs painted across it. Just a reminder, there are 6 big lies broadcast by fox this year awaiting your attempts to prove them correct. You might have forgotten them but don't worry, I'll keep reminding you of your inability to support your claims.

            1. Jim Hunter profile image60
              Jim Hunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              She makes her observations based on the conduct of an elected official.

              You see, Sheriffs are elected not hired.

              This incompetent boob has been giving the defense a case in his attempt to blame people who were not even in Arizona at the time.

              Would you like to bet as to what party the Sheriff belongs to?

              1. Stump Parrish profile image60
                Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                And I assume that means if he is a Democrat, he's lying if his lips are moving, right? I assume that you feel anyone who belongs to a political party should support that party in areas that they disagree with. This police officer states what the contions in his city are and were proir to a crime being committed. By doing so he may have saved additional lives from others who of the same mind. I guess that means you would prefer more people to die than something be done to prevent it if that action harms your party. That makes just as much sense as your comment about the sherriffs political party and you assumption that he places party obedience to doing his job in the manner he feels is best. Should each police department now be required to clear their press releases and comments prior to reporting to the people they are supposed to serve? Of course they should when you consider the declining educational levels in this country. You may be onto something here Jim. Lets start a government agency that will tell each and every American what they should think and do in every aspect of their lives, on a daily basis. That will surely reduce the chance that anyone will ever hear the truth, which is what you seem to be wanting stiffled. Repeat after me, I will only speak the party line, so help me Fox.

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  1) Yes, he is a democrat. Some democrats lie. You disbelieve that?

                  2) Speaking "starting an agency" to control what people say, THAT is the very idea the Dems have been pushing for several days now. And you think it's brilliant posting to blame pubbies for the concept?

                  Pitiful...

            2. lady_love158 profile image61
              lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Excerts from his own words in an interview with Megan Kelley:

              MK: "Why....{what} set him off?"
              SD: "...vitriolic statements made night and day on radio and TV..."

              MK: "Whether there is anything you have uncovered in your investigation, so far, that suggests that the suspected killer was listening to radio or watching television and in any way inspired by what he heard or saw?"

              SD: "Well, I know that there has been some contact with Gabrielle Giffords {and Jared Loughner} in the past. We have... a letter from her dated in 2007 were... she had agreed & invited him to a similar event in 2007."

                    "When millions of dollars are filtered into this country to buy very vitriolic ads, and they don't have to be identified, the countries they are coming from or the people who are donating them, I think it's time that we take a look at it."

                    "We see one party trying to block the attempts of another party to make this a better country." ,p> MK: "There was talk that this JL having threaten threaten to kill somebody, not Gabrielle Giffords, you said, but somebody. Can you share with us any details on that threat?"

              SD: "Well, Megan, if you were my lawyer, you would probably tell me not to answer that question, and I have been told by lawyers not to address that issue at the moment."

              MK: "Was it in the distant past or recent?"

              SD: "Fairly recent


              If that isn't enough for you I suggest you do some more reading and perhaps watch the rest of the interview.

        3. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          1) Do you honest believe that the sheriff is so pure in heart and motives that he will not take advantage of a situation?

          2) Lot's of things "wrong" the conservatives... but this isn't one of them. Why don't you also complain about the way we mistreat unicorns and then blame us for laughing at you because you are "serious" about it.

          3) Your making up stuff from thin air has nothing to do with our "refusal to see" anything.

        4. Jeff Berndt profile image92
          Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          "Who excused the shooter and where did you get this idea lady?"

          She made it up. Nobody is excusing the shooter.

  10. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Funny that some people are trying to have the sheriff re-called. They are going after him guns blazing, just because he spoke out against them!
    Which just shows them for the bullies they are.

    This reminds me of the case here in Mass, where that girl was being bullied, and ended up killing herself.
    Those bulliers had to go to court, because everyone KNEW they were guilty of causing this girl to want to leave this world.

    Did they "pull the trigger"?
    No, but they dam sure made her want to do it!

    Could you prove it in a court of law? Probably not.

    But then again, you can't prove they WEREN'T responsible either.
    Cause and effect.

    1. lovemychris profile image79
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Or it's like my grandson here. These 2 kids keep calling him "N" day after day...what do you suppose will happen?
      Giffords herself said back in March that Palin's crosshairs would have consequences....surely, she is not the only one?
      So, if people knew it was trouble, and let it go....aren't they responsible at all?
      How about all these town-hall meetings that got so violent, and vitriolic?
      Should people really have been able to bring guns there?
      As one blogger said, Republicans were just fine as long as Dems were the targets, now it's not so much fun anymore!

      I just can't believe we're even discussing this!
      Violent rhetoric, hatred towards gvt, guns everywhere, and no one can say that's the problem!!!!

      1. lady_love158 profile image61
        lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You can believe whatever you want. After all, isn't you that believes planets and plants have rights?

        I mean how can anyone argue with you?

      2. 61
        C.J. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You bring up a good point. Did you read the 51 pages the Campus police had on this guy? It's clear they KNEW they were dealing with an "unhinged" person. The local PD was aware of him as well. You would think they would have stopped this man before he commited this tragedy.

        1. Doug Hughes profile image60
          Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Stop him how?  There was a time in ths country when the opinion that a person was crazy could result in being 'jailed' in a mental institution with no rights or recourse. Nobody wants to go back to that time. (I hope.)

          We all wish his family had taken action to require medical intervention but it's hard/ Once a person is over 18,  the authority of the family is limited.

          Bottom line - until an adult either commits himself to an institution or commits a crime, you can't just haul him off and lock him in a padded cell.

    2. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      1) "guns blazing"? How droll of you. Now you're contributing to the carnage if someone takes a shot at the sheriff. You should be ashamed of yourself down to your toenails.

      2) Holding elected officials accountable is now "bullying"? I'd bet you are going to post in a year that the Republicans are "bullying" Obama because they are daring to run against him for president.

  11. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago

    Don't blame Sarah or guns? (not really sure how you blame an inanimate object).

    This guy was irrational, anti-education, and had a very weird way of looking at things.  All he's missing is a short-lived stint as governor; the tea party adores and votes for people like Loghner.

    1. WalterDamage profile image60
      WalterDamageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Odd, I'm not aware of the Tea Party endorsing or voting for any candidate who was a mass murderer.

      Perhaps you can enlighten us.....

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
        Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Went right over your head huh?

      2. Doug Hughes profile image60
        Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        "Odd, I'm not aware of the Tea Party endorsing or voting for any candidate who was a mass murderer."

        The Tea Party (so far) only encourages mass murder - they haven't actually put up a mass murderer as a candidate - yet.

        "On May 10, 2010, House candidate Brad Goerhing from California's 11th District wrote on his Facebook page: "If I could issue hunting permits, I would officially declare today opening day for liberals. The season would extend through November 2 and have no limits on how many taken as we desperately need to 'thin' the herd."

    2. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      And ~this~ is the very best poor Ron can do, eh.

  12. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago

    "An attempt on you could bring the republic down." - Fox News's Glenn Beck, encouraging Sarah Palin in a letter to "look into protection for your family."

  13. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago

    "This Jared guy's chalkboard in his basement, I'm not sure it wouldn't look that different than Glenn Beck's chalkboard." - HBO's Bill Maher, discussing the Tucson shooter.

    1. WalterDamage profile image60
      WalterDamageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, wow, a quote from a liberal to prove your argument.

      Brilliant....

      1. lady_love158 profile image61
        lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        LOL! No it's perfect! It showes exactly how the left from the very beginning of this tragedy has accused the right of motivating the shooter without ANY evidence, and when actually there is evidence of the CONTRARY, that this shooter was a liberal! His favorite book was the communist manifesto! That's Obama's bible! LOL

        1. Doug Hughes profile image60
          Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You keep mis-characterizing what the left is saying. But  you play fast and loose with the facts. We are not blaming Saint Sarah of Holy Victimhood for the shootings. What I am doing - I am not all liberals - is holding up two pictures. One is  a graphic of the Arizona slaughter. The second  is the violent rhetoric from the Tea Party. I'm asking moderates to note the similarities and make their own call about whether these people should hold positions of authority.

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Did you hold up the two democrat graphics showing the same thing and ask if those people should hold power?

    2. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, because we all know that Maher is the voice of reason. Perhaps Beck has a skull shrine out in his backyard also like the shooter.

  14. Jack Burton profile image81
    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago

    Stump...

    You're complete discounting that the sheriff is a highly partisan Democrat who has already in the past purposefully lied to make conservatives look bad. Why should we believe him now? And unless he looked into the brain of the shooter why should we believe he has any extra insight as to what the motive was?

    1. Stump Parrish profile image60
      Stump Parrishposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Well you have a good point considering how many times Fox news has been shown to lie to it's viewers and its fans quit conversations when you point this out, That's avoiding the facts. I honestly don't know that much about the political atmosphere in Tuscan. I tend to pay attention when a police officer from a town is discussing what he sees on a daily basis. What I have seen is trhat many have assumed that he is a Democrat and therefor lying. Anythign that disgrees with the party line is attacked full force. Do you actually believe that the Republican Party and the Tea Party are incapable of lying? Joining the Republican Party is not quite the same as becoming a NAZI or is it? Part of your membership package seems to be a get out of stupid free card. The absolute refusal to admit that the violent rehtoric had anything to do with this, as you say with out the facts is rediculous. The sad thing is that even if this is proven to be the case beyond a shadow of a doubt, the facts will be dismissed and ignored by the faithful flock of sheep the right has become.

      1. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        1)) yet to show an actual time that Fox news "lied" eh.

        2) Like the sheriff, you "don't know" but you're willing to entertain a published opinion.

        3) No, we say he is lying becuase he is lying. What else are we supposed to say about someone lying.

        4) Mr. Obama was very emphatic about the "violent rhetoric" having anything to do wiht it. He said, forcefully, "It did not." Perhaps he was lying, eh.

        5) Speaking of facts, I have not heard you discuss the "fact" that everyone who knew this kid declared that he was a "leftist."

        6) Nazis, eh. And ~that~ is the best you can do.

  15. Pcunix profile image90
    Pcunixposted 5 years ago

    Well, I had hoped this tragedy might have caused some to look both inward and outward  but unfortunately the usual crowd still holds to the usual distortions and evasions.

    I'm so sick of conservatives.. I'm sorry, but it's just impossible to work with them.

    We probably are heading for civil war. I hope I am dead before it happens.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, because conservatives dare defend themselves against scurrilous attacks with no base you get sick of them. Be prepared to be ill the rest of your life.

      1. oceansnsunsets profile image89
        oceansnsunsetsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Great point Jack, I can't even believe what I am reading from some of the Liberals here, after the facts are out.  Its past time to be blaming a liberal Marxists behavior ON Conservatives.  That makes no sense at all.   This is what I have come to expect from the worst ones, but not all.  I did see one liberal saying how stupid they were all being to be fair to him.

    2. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The conservatives have far and away the majority of the guns and the people who know how and when to use them. Bring your civil war on if you really want one. But your eliminist rhetoric against conservatives is going to mark you as one of the leaders.

      1. 61
        C.J. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Dude, your dancing around a threat.....Not cool.

        1. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          He's the one using eliminist rhetoric. He's the one predicting a "civil war." I'd say the threat begins and ends with him.

        2. lovemychris profile image79
          lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          This is your party cj. You just can't see it.

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            cj...

            ~this~ is the poster who used the expression "guns blazing" to describe the normal actions of folk yet she wants everyone else to be the guilty ones. I don't think her credibility is very high with anyone who actually reads these posts.

            1. lovemychris profile image79
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Who cares what you think?

              1. Jack Burton profile image81
                Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Touched a nerve, eh.

                1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
                  Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  LMC says all kinds of crazy stuff. I've come to the conclusion that smiling while backing away slowly is the best response.

  16. Pcunix profile image90
    Pcunixposted 5 years ago

    Thank you for proving my point.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The only "point" you made was using clear, eliminist language against conservatives. And saying that a civil war was coming? YOU said that. Not anyone else. YOU brought that up. Not anyone else.

      Typical hit and run liberal poster. Doesn't even have the courage to back up what he really believes.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        He's not coming back because you're so "fun" to deal with...a regular Bob Hope you are.  SNORT

        1. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          And ~this~ is the best you can do, eh. :-)

  17. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Yeah....We don't like you....BOOOOOM. Blow you away.

    What did you prove? Might makes Right. Have fun with your all-the-same people.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Hmmm... it was PC who was looking towards a civil war. HE said that. Not anyone else. Him. Typical, eh. Like the Dem who wished that a republican candidate for governor would be "shot" and Palin gets the blame for using harsh language?

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Oh bull. Palin used crosshairs and now she's too much of a cry-baby to own up to it....Boohoo...poor me. I got caught.

        1. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You mean JUST LIKE ALL THE TARGETS that the Dems used in their advertising... that have all amazingly disappeared from their websites. And like the "bullseye" that the highly considered Dem operative, Kos, put on the congresswoman BY NAME because she was too conservative for his liberal views?

          Want to discuss ~those~ for a while?

          1. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Why? You think there's nothing wrong with it!!!

            1. Jack Burton profile image81
              Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Nothing wrong with it? Like Clinton's "war room". Did any reasonable person think clinton was going to "war"? Or Obama reference to "bring a gun" to a political debate? Did any reasonable person think obama was actually going to bring a gun, or encouraging his supports to do so during his campaign. The very word "campaign" comes from the military with two sides at battle, trying to kill one another.

              So just what am I supposed to think is "wrong" with words and imagery that have been used since the very beginning of politics by all sides, everywhere?

              1. Doug Hughes profile image60
                Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                So you think this is appropriate?

                "On May 10, 2010, House candidate Brad Goerhing from California's 11th District wrote on his Facebook page: "If I could issue hunting permits, I would officially declare today opening day for liberals. The season would extend through November 2 and have no limits on how many taken as we desperately need to 'thin' the herd."

                Sounds like what the Arizona shooter did. Or were republicans taken to the morgue?

                1. Doug Hughes profile image60
                  Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Is this how a candidate should speak?

                  On June 12, 2010, Rep. Giffords' very own Republican opponent Jesse Kelly held an event advertised locally as follows: "Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 With Jesse Kelly."

                  Really sweet!

                  1. Doug Hughes profile image60
                    Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Tea Party Candidates do this -

                    On October 9, 2009, House candidate Robert Lowry of Florida held an event at a Broward County gun range during which he fired at a series of symbolic political targets, including a silhouette with his opponent Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's initials on it.

                    So do you think  a candidate should do target practice using a picture of their opponent?  (or a named silhouette)

                2. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  About as appropriate at this...

                  "That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida," Mr. Kanjorski said. "Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he's running for governor of Florida. He's a millionaire and a billionaire. He's no hero. He's a damn crook. It's just we don't prosecute big crooks."

                        -------Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa.

                  Or maybe as appropriate as Montel Willims telling Republican Rep. Michele Bachman:

                  WILLIAMS: Michele, slit your wrist.

                  Go ahead… or, do us all a better thing [sic].

                  Move that knife up about two feet.

                  Start right at the collarbone.

                  1. Doug Hughes profile image60
                    Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Montel Williams was/is not a candidate for office. His comments were over the top, but he's a TV celebrity out for ratings.

                    Mr. Kanjorski is the ONLY democrat I can find who crossed the line. The only one, and I agree he did. However two points partially mitigate his statement.

                    Kanjorski is up North somewhere, was not running against Rick Scott. It was a threat that should not have been made, but it was not against his opponent in the race. Second - Rick Scott is a bilionare who spent tens of millions of his fortune to get elected. He got - I will not use the word 'earned' - the money as CEO of a medical company who was fined for MASSIVE medicare fraud - his company, while Scott was CEO, received the highest fine for Medicare fraud that any company has ever received. When he was questioned about what he knew, Scott took the 5th amendment 50-something times. He stonewalled. No, I do not say he should be shot. He does belong in a nasty jail with unfriendly inmates, rats and other vermin for a long time, but he actually bought the Governor's Mansion. If you have that context, you can understand why a democrat went over the top in his comments.

              2. John Holden profile image59
                John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Everywhere?
                Are you really sure about that because we never see such imagery nor hear such rhetoric.

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Well, John, if you want to tell us you've never heard of the Clinton War Room or even the word "campaign" that is up to you. I wouldn't brag about in public, though, if I were you.

                  1. John Holden profile image59
                    John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Well no, I've never heard of the Clinton War room, but I was thinking more of the rhetoric and imagery. All this talk of shooting opponents, all this talk of re-arming and reloading is not universal and just does not occur everywhere. Or images of targets and cross-hairs, we don't see them everywhere either.
                    Remember the US is not the whole world, it's not even the whole of these forums.

      2. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        No--he can just see the future...as can a lot of us. It's depressing. Have fun Mein Herr.

        1. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Hmmm.... another civil war looker-forwarder too.

          And isn't so awkward to think that our poster and Hitler have so much in common about gun control and keeping guns away from ordinary folk... but yet she tries to tie us into him when it's so obvious that we would like nothing better than for everyone to have the freedom of choice as to make up their own mind about guns.

          1. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I have never said anything about gun control. Not ever. Not even once. Not even in my sleep. Not even in my mothers womb. Not even as a twinkle in my fathers eye.
            You are making things up. tisk tisk

            1. Pcunix profile image90
              Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I fully support the right to keep and bear arms. I do not own any weapons myself, but I am glad that my neighbors do.  Many liberals have similar opinions.

              .

            2. Jack Burton profile image81
              Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Okay... so just where do you stand on gun control. You've got the floor...

        2. junko profile image79
          junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Guns and Palin shouldn't be blame. Guns don't kill and what Palin did was tame in comparison to what has been said by too many people. We should think about what we say to millons of people about millons of people and their leaders. Guns and Palin smokes up the mirror. It's just an illusion.

  18. thisisoli profile image66
    thisisoliposted 5 years ago

    I have seen a huge amount of blogs, forum posts, and articles in certain papers telling the left to stop blaming Palin for the shooting, and yet I have barely seen anyone, right or left, blame Palin for the shooting, especially not in any seriousness.

    *Edit* Retract this statement, it appears that a wide variety of internet people have jumped onteh political agenda.

    1. lovemychris profile image79
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Well, look who did:

      "We speak with Tucson shooting survivor Eric Fuller. A 63-year-old disabled veteran, Fuller had campaigned for Arizona Democrat Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in her reelection campaign and was at the supermarket in Tucson on Saturday to meet with her. He was shot in the knee and also wounded in the back. "It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target," Fuller says. "Their wish for Second Amendment activism has been fulfilled."

      This is from Democracy Now, Jan 14,2011. You can watch the video.

      1. Druid Dude profile image61
        Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Battle lines are being drawn. Instead of North and South, now it's Left and Right. History is repeating itself. Watch.

        1. Druid Dude profile image61
          Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          If not Palin and guns, can we blame Fox and Beck? Seems everyone usually focuses on the weed that was involved.

          1. junko profile image79
            junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            The focus should be on toxic rhetoric, nothing or nobody else. That's the problem. If the shooter could be identified with the left or the right the problem would still be Toxic Rhetoric. At this point the shooter stands alone.

            1. Jack Burton profile image81
              Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              At this point the shooter stands as a seriously disturbed, pot-addicted, skull-worshiping young man who was seeing and living nightmares in his head.

              If you want to keep your public discourse at such a level that you do nothing to set a person such as this off that is fine... but don't expect everyone else to cater to the most crazy of the crazy.

              1. junko profile image79
                junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Jack: What are you saying??? Do that again in other words.

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Okay junko... let me see if I can put this into an analogy... of course, like all analogies the fit isn't perfect but we'll give it a whirl...

                  Let's say that I am overweight. Not just fat... but obese. I love to eat. If food is anywhere around me it is going to get eaten.

                  Now, there are lots of reasons why this is a bad idea for me. It affects my health, it causes problems for people who need to sit next to me on airplanes, and it may even cost society extra money for the extra health care I need being so obese.

                  It is not a good idea for me to be obese.

                  So I am at a Chinese buffet... a perfect place for me to eat, eh. And there are five spring rolls left. It's getting close to  the end of the night so they are not going to be coming out with any more egg rolls. I grab all five egg rolls for myself. It's not really a socially acceptable thing to do, but I do it because I like to eat.

                  What I didn't know is that over there in the corner is a man who was once married to a Chinese girl and she always fixed his favorite food, spring rolls. Since she left him for a Hatian pig farmer he has slipped a cog and has gotten very mentally unstable, always obsessing about spring rolls and how he cannot find a good one to eat anymore. He's heard that they have the best spring rolls in the city at this restaruant and he's come to eat one.

                  Well, MY taking all five spring rolls pushes him over the edge. Could I have taken four and left one...l or three and two. Of course. But I didn't. What I did do was perhaps crass, crude, unthinking and even unethical.

                  But when he snaps, pulls out a samauria sword and starts in cutting people up in the restaurant was it actually, truely, MY fault? Do you want to adjust YOUR eating habits for fear that someone, somewhere may snap over something that you might have done?

                  So the local politicians get involved. And they pass a rule that no one can ever take the last piece of anything at a buffet "just in case." Every single person who goes to a buffet now has their behaviour modified by the past actions of a crazy person who was what is called a "one off." A one of a kind that will probably never be seen again.

                  But because we now have politics involved we are going to live with his legacy long after he is dead. Restaurants wind up throwing away food that someone could have eaten, people go hungry because no one is allowed to take that last piece, and BTW, of course, no one is fat anymore. Or crazy. Yeah. Right.

                  But it doesn't end there. Oh no...

                  Because my Alledged Bad Behaviour is supposedly the root cause of this whole tragedy, and that behaviour is rooted in my weight, the politicians and society feel perfectly justified in passing laws forbidding any overweight people. And as they see folk everywhere slimming down to avoid being put into jail someone comes up wiht the idea that they can do a little bit better for society. So new laws are passed that forbid eating more that 3 oz. of  red meat a day. It's for the children, you know. And then a law is passed that says mandatory chicken four days a week, and vegetariion the other three days. And then a law is passed...

                  And that is the whole situation in food talk.

                  This shooter was a nut case. The political language may or may not be fair, civilized, honest, or what anyone would want. Or even a "good idea." But that has NOTHING to do with the fact this guy was a nutcase.

                  Attacking the language used in politics because of this incident and demanding a change is no different than demanding that I lose weight to prevent anymore restaurant samauri sword attacks.

                  And the same as suddenly the food police began more and more encroachment upon people's diets there are those outthere who want to use this for their own gain in determining what is acceptable political talk and what isn't.

                  It may seem "reasonable" in the beginning but you can bet the mortgage that before it is finished there will be "good reasons" why ANY disagreement at all with what the liberals want to push will be declared "off limits" to any discussion. After all, what they want is so good for us, and so necessary, that any diagreement must be done purely for hatred and stupidity. So why not shut it up?

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image94
                    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Ah!  Pro-choice!

                  2. junko profile image79
                    junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Thanks Jack: I appreiate you having the time and patience you took to explain what you were talking about . I enjoyed your story about the big man who liked to eat out. Lol. I was talking about toxic rhetoric. Jack you and I disagree politically I sense. We are prime examples of non-toxic rhetoric. I must say, that I believe that that big man is a danger to himself and society.

        2. junko profile image79
          junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Not North and South, but Right and Wrong.

  19. Onusonus profile image88
    Onusonusposted 5 years ago

    To everyone who is calling for stricter gun laws in light of the tragedy in Tucson, may I offer this little tidbit: If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars drive drunk, and spoons make people fat. Remember: Hold the person accountable for their actions, not the means they chose to utilize!!!

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Just curious, I've seen this exact phrase parroted by about a dozen right-wingers in various forums today.

      Who supplied the line: Beck, Limbaugh?

      Fess up.

      1. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Typical... much more fascinated with finding a villain that in actually confronting the truth of what was posted. :-)

        Got to be a conservative master mind-controller out there somewhere.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
          Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You don't even know do you?

          Who said it first?

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Fascinating how obsessed you've become with this. Is this a recent development or have you had it for a while?

            1. Pcunix profile image90
              Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              He's simply pointing out how everyone of you marches in lockstep, parroting the words of your masters.

              1. Jack Burton profile image81
                Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Really... so in YOUR world people using the same phrase (which has not in any way been shown to be untruthful or wrong) is identical to "marching in lockstep, [and] parroting the words of your masters"

                What a small, little, cramped fantasy world you live it.

                1. Pcunix profile image90
                  Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually, the problem for liberals is that we do NOT all think alike.  We have good numbers,; we just can't agree on much.

                  For example, I'm against gun control and ambivalent about abortion rights. I have firm beliefs about the necessity of a strong central government, but, like many conservatives, I also fear the abuse that can stem from that.  When I get together with my liberal friends, we argue about everything.  Liberals hardly ever quote authority: we don't believe in it.

                  Unlike you, I do not march in lockstep with what anyone says. I think for myself, as most liberals do. Most conservatives do not: you come to consensus easily and adopt the party line for the greater good.

                  I'm not saying all of you are unthinking sheeples blindly following your masters necessarily - I think for many of you it is a reasoned and conscious decision to support certain policies because you realize the power of the masses and you are willing to subjugate your individuality for a greater purpose. Often this comes from strong religious groundings, deep patriotism and a real need for order and structure.

                  In may ways, the conservative viewpoint makes sense: if we could get everyone to play along, we'd have a better world. Well, a very homogenized world, but safer, more productive, less unpredictable.

                  Unfortunately, a lot of us just aren't wired that way. We think for ourselves. Many of us are not religious and don't really believe in patriotism. We don't like the predictable order and structure that comforts you so.  We think nothing is so sacred that it cannot be questioned.

                  And that, simple though it is, is why we cannot get along and why, given their druthers, people holding to the extremes of conservatism see liberals as very dangerous.

                  1. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    "Unlike you, I do not march in lockstep with what anyone says. I think for myself, as most liberals do. Most conservatives do not: you come to consensus easily and adopt the party line for the greater good."

                    And ~this~ is why there is little hope for agreement, Dear Readers. When one side such as pc lives in such a fantasy world to actually believe and post something such as this then where is the hope of communication? I'd have better luck dialogging with a watermelon.

                  2. habee profile image91
                    habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Wow, PQ- that was a very profound post, and I agree with most of it. I have several Democratic pals, and what I don't understand about their thinking is that several of them will admit that they'll always vote D, no matter who the candidate is. Two of them, in fact, have said, "I'd vote for a jackass if it had a D after it." I don't really understand that. I guess I vote more for the individual. I usually vote R, but I have voted for numerous Democrats, including those running for POTUS and national office.

        2. Onusonus profile image88
          Onusonusposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          It's typical lefty protocal to ignore the statement of fact and go right in for the standard character assasination attempts. The lefty agenda is all about hate.
          -Global warming is about hating industry and industrialists
          -Healthcare is about sticking it to rich white people
          -Atheism is about hating Christianity
          -Gay rights are about sticking it to heterosexual two parent families and core values
          -Abortions should be the right of a woman beause its not really a baby
          -Universal Health care should be a law because some people do not have it

          1. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Ahahaha!!

            Earth to Onusonus!! Earth to Onusonus!!

            Major malfunction.... rapidly approaching planet Dis-engage From.  Reality sought quick before mind evaporates completely!!

    2. tony0724 profile image59
      tony0724posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Please refrain from pragmatic thinking. This is the Hubpages forums, we don't allow that.

      1. Onusonus profile image88
        Onusonusposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        sad

  20. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Sure, no possible reason for stricter gun control!
    Why not give guns to all mentally unbalanced people in America?
    And since they're unbalanced, they probably should have semi-automatics as those are so much easier to shoot and require less reloading. Perfect weapon for those whose intent is going on a shooting spree.
    But wait! Why stop there?
    Let's make sure they can conceal their weapons without needing a permit.
    That way, when they're out stalking the object of their deluded fantasy, they'll be able to get up close and personal without anyone in the crowd knowing they're packing.
    Bloody (no pun intended, honest brilliant!!

    Hip, hip, hooray for the Second Amendment.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      And ~that's~ the very best you can do, eh.

    2. habee profile image91
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Too late. Metally unbalanced people already have guns. (Like Randy Godwin! lol)

  21. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Actually, Jack, that is nowhere near the best I can do.
    I save my best for people who deserve it.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      We could tell it wasn't your best... or your second best... or third... or fourth...

      Probably the best words to describe it are "inane, thoughtless, and without merit". But it makes you a very worthy representative for liberals and democrats. And it holds up the standards by which we have come to expect. So all in all... good job.

      1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
        Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Jack, if you think MM's post is 'inane,' etc, well, let's see you take it apart and show us why her position and the arguments supporting it are flawed.

        'Cos when you just say stuff like, "~that's~ the best you can do, eh?" and "[Your post was] inane, thoughtless, and without merit," well, that's not very convincing. It's basically the rhetorical equivalent of saying, "Is not!"

        You're not arguing, you're just contradicting.

        1. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Not contradicting... just pointing out to the Dear Readers the bankruptcy of her postings. Contrary to belief not every post needs to be "answered".

          She's the hubpages equivalent to a "flat earther." There is no need for me to do anything other than mock her when she posts such dribble.

          1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
            Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            "just pointing out to the Dear Readers the bankruptcy of her postings."

            But with no logical or evidential support of your assessment.

            It's as if a movie critic merely said, "This movie is bad. Don't go see it."

            Okay, but why is it bad? Is it poorly directed? Poorly acted? Are the costumes somehow inappropriate or anachronistic? Is the story not believable?

            But you basically just say: "MM is wrong, and her post is silly."

            Saying something is so doesn't convince people who don't already agree with you.

            "There is no need for me to do anything other than mock her when she posts such dribble."

            Heh, yeah there is, if you expect to convince anybody of anything.

            1. Jack Burton profile image81
              Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              1) You want to figure out a way to "logically" answer:

              "Why not give guns to all mentally unbalanced people in America?
              And since they're unbalanced, they probably should have semi-automatics as those are so much easier to shoot and require less reloading. Perfect weapon for those whose intent is going on a shooting spree."

              ...then go for it.  I'd rather just snicker about it like the other Dear Readers.

              2) If you think she's so convincing when she posts that I have to persuade the readers otherwise I think you have a pretty low opinion of those same readers.

              3) She herself admitted that it was not a very good effort and she didn't even try. I am not sure in what universe that obligates me to respond.

              1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
                Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Your sarcasm filter appears to be broken...

                "I am not sure in what universe that obligates me to respond."
                You're not obligated to respond, but you did. You just didn't respond very well.

                PS: Is not, is not, infinity! tongue

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  I never said it wasn't sarcasm i my original post... I just said it was the best she could do...

                  And my "response" is dictated by what I see best... not how others would want me to comment.

  22. 0
    Pezzyposted 5 years ago

    To own a gun for hunting is one thing, but to have a gun with the ability to hold a magazine of 30 or more is another. Guns like these should not be sold.

  23. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Randy, Jack does speak for others!
    He speaks for selfish people who go to Chinese buffets and grab all the egg rolls. ALL the egg rolls! When he could (by his own admission) have taken only four and left one, or taken three and left two.
    Typical greedy Republican. Take it all and leave nothing for the poor guy sitting in the corner lol lol !!!

    1. habee profile image91
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Correction, MM. He said "spring rolls," not "egg rolls." I don't like spring rolls, but I love egg rolls. Typical liberal -misquoting a conservative Chinese diner. LOL!!

  24. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Why don't they just grow up!
    Sarah--you should admit you were wrong and stop your divisive ways...because you DO act like Democrats are beneath your feet. Even the president!

    The Tea-Party as a whole, needs to realize that there are a WHOLE lot of people here besides them!

    Do you realize that if Palin had just said, "Those cross-hairs were a big mistake, never again"....or something like that....voila! All this agitating would have been over!

    But, they have this baby mentality!
    Here is Russsshhhhh, after Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) said about Giffords,“She is the vision of hope for this country right now. She embodies everything that President Obama was trying to say that we have to be better than we are, that we all have to conduct ourselves better than we do.”

    LIMBAUGH: What I don’t like about this is the assumption that we are no good! The premise that we are no good! Yes that’s true. We really stink. We have to work a lot harder to become better people. We are going to really have to work harder to become better than we are. Who are they to castigate all the rest of us?! If they want to catagorize some of us as not good enough, fine and dandy! But who are they? Why do we have to listen to these people tell us we’re not as good as we can be? What message are we supposed to hear here? What’s the message that we have to – we’re all ready for improvement? The GOP is supposed to capitulate? That’s how we get along with everybody?

    That is how my 4 year old acts.
    Who said you were no good?
    Who said you need to capitulate?

    Grow up and join the human race! United States, not YOUR states.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      1) It's pretty "childish" to think that one party gets to promote it's agenda without anyone being able to say otherwise. That's downright undemocratice... but expected.

      2) The tea party battles it out in elections as the constitution calls for. The winner gets the office. Do you dispute this as a proper way to run a government for the people, and by the people.

      3) Do you believe all the democrat ads that featured targets on the variouis states were "mistakes"? If so, why have you not called on the various dems who did it to admit a mistake.

      4) I am sure your four your old acts that way. You just would rather pubblies roll over when the dems get upset. The idea that a pubbie actually defends himself, or the party, or the ideas, just grates on you, doesn't it.

      5) The tea party is the one involved in politics and running for office. YOU are the one who wants to shut them up when they disagree with you. Which represents the "united states" the best?

      1. junko profile image79
        junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Jack: The Republicans can and will promote their adjenda now. Point one is mute. Point two is the democratic way. Point three, no I don't believe it was a mistake. I don't believe guns, Palin, or targets are as dangerous as Toxic Rhetoric. I didn't get the point of point four. Point five, I say they both represent the United States.

  25. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    ooops, well....maybe they WANT their own states?

  26. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    out of left field, but.....
    American Independence Party. Palin's husband used to belong. Far-right radicals. Secessionists. I remember because it was discussed on my local blog way in the beginning of Palin's sudden appearance.
    It was real ugly...the founder said he "would not be buried under this flag"...stuff like that. Real hatred of THIS America....Freedom from "Liberalism" is in their platform.

    Rick Perry--Tea-Party and secessionist....
    Maybe that is what they are after...their own separate state, or states within America?

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      And here was a map done by the liberals after the 2004 elections...

      http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/funn … usland.htm

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Ummmm, this is 2011. Back to the future if you don't mind. If you keep needing the past to defend the present, you better just pack it up!!!

        These people want their own country....not a shared prosperity, but an OverLordship. IMO.

  27. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Or a take-over of the whole?

  28. Mark Ewbie profile image83
    Mark Ewbieposted 5 years ago

    As a Brit can I say the idea of being able to just buy a gun fascinating.  We have our fair share of nutters over here and sometimes they get guns and kill people.  Mainly in Iraq or Northern Ireland of course, but sometimes in places like Little Whittering too.

    A plus point of relaxing our laws would be I could stop next door's cat crapping on my lawn I suppose.

    I tried to make a serious point here, but you wouldn't listen anyway.  Not unless I pointed a gun at your head.

    1. kirstenblog profile image78
      kirstenblogposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      and now you know why we love our guns lol

    2. Randy Godwin profile image94
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Especially if that cat is a panther eating your child or pet.  Not so impossible where I live!  Or you could run out there and yell "scat" if you would prefer.  Hmmm, choices, choices! smile

      1. SomewayOuttaHere profile image59
        SomewayOuttaHereposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        lol...now you know he's talkin' about a 'puuddy cat'...not a panther!...big ones where i am too....scat cat wouldn't do it...wouldn't have the chance to say 'scat'....or even see it comin'...  big_smile

        1. Mark Ewbie profile image83
          Mark Ewbieposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Ok guys.  It's different in England.  But some of those puddy cats you still wouldn't want to mess with them.  Could get a nasty scratch. Nanny would need to put a plaster on.

          What am I doing? Try this...

          yeah, spit, reckon them thar cats are purdy damn big , I reckon. Sniff, I ain't going holler out the porch no more, just line 'em up with my Palinomatic and ka-boom - no more pussy for me.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image94
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            It may just be your personality causing your lack!  smile

  29. Uninvited Writer profile image83
    Uninvited Writerposted 5 years ago

    The only people still talking about this are right wing blogs the rest of us have move on.

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      errr... YOU are posting about it. Rightwing, I assume?

  30. Jack Burton profile image81
    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago

    Liberal NYT columnist blasts Left for “witch hunt” after Tucson shooting

    It’s not Ross Douthat or David Brooks, either, but Charles Blow — the same writer who once called black Tea Party activists a “political minstrel show.”  Blow admits that the temptation to lay the blame for the shootings in Tucson on the Right was strong, but that in doing so, and in insisting on sticking with the attacks after all the evidence showed that the shooter was an apolitical lunatic, the Left have adopted an “any means necessary” approach that will destroy their credibility

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/15/n … -shooting/

    1. lovemychris profile image79
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      He's entitled to his own opinion....as we all are. He's not right though.....I AM!!! I AM THAT I AM.
      You is that you is. He be that he be. She was that she was.
      No one is allowed to hold all the answers......."aint that America...for you and me?"

    2. habee profile image91
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I read this is the New York Times, and I thought Blow expressed my own feelings on the issue.

  31. Jack Burton profile image81
    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago

    Awwwww.... really, really bad news for those posters here who suffer from Palin Derangement Syndrome.

    "A new national study among 1,437 self-reported Democrats, Republicans and Independents revealed that Americans indicated that Sarah Palin was more sincere and believable after viewing her speech in response to the shootings in Tucson."

    http://mediacurves.com/Politics/SarahPa … /Index.cfm

    1. lovemychris profile image79
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, I've got that! It's even worse Doctor.....I'm sick from the whole movement!!!

  32. Jack Burton profile image81
    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago

    Yesterday morning, UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert J. Birgeneau e-mailed the campus community with regard to the horrendous mass shooting in Arizona that killed a federal judge, a 9-year-old girl, and several others while gravely injuring Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the apparent target of the attack.

    Chancellor Birgeneau's e-mail is very ill-considered for a variety of reasons.

          ----Adam Kissel, Huffington Post

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-kiss … 07616.html

  33. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Mr. Burton,
    You might find people more receptive to your ideas if
    a) You did not express them in such a condescending manner. Perhaps you really do look down upon the rest of us, but referring to fellow hubbers as "Dear Readers" and "son" immediately sets your "dear" readers' teeth on edge.
    It is also questionable that John Holden is sufficiently younger than you to be called "son." That is demeaning, and either you are well aware and do it on purpose or you are unaware, in which case I am pointing it out.
    b) You took the time to spell correctly. Unless, of course, you are among those anti-elitists who eschew proper English in their communication.

    No need to "refudiate" with your standard "inane argument" and "Is that the best you can do?" posts.
    This is not an argument. It's an observation.
    Your not-so-dear friend,
    Mighty Mom the flat earther

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry, Mom... I don't take lessons in deportment from people who post...

      "Why not give guns to all mentally unbalanced people in America?
      And since they're unbalanced, they probably should have semi-automatics as those are so much easier to shoot and require less reloading. Perfect weapon for those whose intent is going on a shooting spree."

      And, like the Great Carnac, Ican predict things... such as your claiming that somehow, somewhere in this emotional rant you were "just kidding" or using "sarcasm."

      So go ahead and claim it. But then you're in the position of trying to claim a particular style of posting while telling others how they should post.

      And I am  glad you've also decided to take on the roll of spelling police. When posters start in focusing in on that it's pretty much clear that they have very little of value to contribute.

  34. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    You know, when Randy Godwin said who is "we"?, I think he was on to something...

    I notice this on my local blog too.
    Whenever a heated disscusion comes up, they send in all the heavy hitters.

    And I SWEAR, I know this Reality Bites from somewhere....just seems so familiar....
    Plus, she left me a real nasty response to a hub...reminiscent of the nasty responses I get all the time at home smile
    Oh, it warms the cockles!

    And Jim!  When he said, "I thought you were leaving."
    Same exact thing as home. And the one at home once said, "So, who is lovemychris?"

    I think you've been inundated by Righty's from Cape Cod!!

    Even though Jim was here first...as tk sensei?

    Well, just an intuitive feeling, but I do think there is a "WE", and  I do think they monitor blogs to "get the word out". 
    If I'm lyin, I'm dyin!

    1. junko profile image79
      junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      lovemychris: Do you think they are working together to create a weapon of mass distraction?

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        No, but I do notice that certain of the vilest things start popping up when "one of their own" is under attack.
        That's all.
        And, I find it interesting that investigators saw the same kind of threats used by Loughner and also by someone who was threatening another Democratic politician in California.
        And that this other Democrat was threatened on behalf of Sarah Palin.--he was asking too many questions.

        Same as here. When people state the obvious--that violent gun imagery and talk pounded into  mass consciousness-or even subtly- will ultimately lead to violence with guns.--

        All of a sudden, the conversation changes.
        To pity for palin.
        To what the bad, bad Democrats have done.
        To attacks on fellow Hubbers.
        Anything but admit the simple truth, and hold the perpetrators accountable.

        It's very interesting, and I see it on my local blog as well. Certain people are silent, until they are needed for attack.

        1. junko profile image79
          junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          There is something to what you are saying. I sometime feel boycotted on these hub pages. I feel that my hubs are blocked.

          1. junko profile image79
            junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            They supports each others bad hugs

          2. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Careful....now you are in "crazy" territory.
            It's ok to question......just not too much.

            This is the result of what David Icke said years ago: The powers that be do not need to police us....we will do it to each other.

            Heres' the thinking I like, it's John Lennon: I believe anything until it's proven otherwise.

            It's funny how much our minds have closed since the 60's.

        2. Jack Burton profile image81
          Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          In other words...liberals should have their own hubs where conservatives and others are not allowed to post rebuttals to the obviously wrong info.

          Why don't you suggest it to the PTB and see if the idea will fly...

          1. junko profile image79
            junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Jack: I think Chris is right about crazy territory. It's not what you know, but what you can prove. What you Think?

            1. Pcunix profile image90
              Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              What todays Talking Points tell him to think?

              That's my uncharitable guess. 

              All we ever need to do is switch on Fox News to see what these folks will be saying in the forums. Some of them obviously even write it down so they don't make any mistake when the opportunity comes to parrot it back.

              As I said before, I love it when they accidentally find themselves in the midst of a subject they have not yet heard Official Opinion on. Their reluctance to commit to any opinion is just so laughable. They are usually smart enough to stay out until they can do some research, but not always.

              1. Jack Burton profile image81
                Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                And ~this~ is really the best that pc can do, eh. Accuse others of having no real opinion.

                Pitiful.

                1. Pcunix profile image90
                  Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  You do know that you repeat this silly mantra far too often?

                  1. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Only to posts that deserve it... :-)

                2. junko profile image79
                  junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Jack you don't want to talk to me? I ask for your opinion. I respect your opinion. Whats up with That???

                  1. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Junko... I think you need to go back and re-read my answer to you. It appears you may have crossed posted on the wrong post.

                    It happens.

            2. Jack Burton profile image81
              Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You'll have to reword that for me to know exactly what you are getting at. I'll answer if I can, but I am not really sure where you are going with it.

              1. lovemychris profile image79
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                I'm not answering for junko, but here's what I think:
                If I say that the violent rhetoric and images lead to the actual committing of violent acts, some people say "Oh, don't be stupid, you are crazy for thinking that."

                Well, why is that crazy? Can you prove that those words and images didn't contribute to the actions?
                To me it's obvious that they did. Obvious to me as it is stupid to you!

                And if they are completely innocent, then why did people get so upset with the song "Cop Killer"?
                Why were there demonstrations, and ultimately, legal actions taken against rap music?

                They were held to be responsible. Now they must put warning labels on albums.

                I just read a great article on the difference between blame and responsibility.
                People are not so much putting blame on Palin, Bachmann, Angle, etc., but asking them to accept responsibility for the words and images they put into the political atmosphere...and to stop doing it!

                To me it is obvious as night and day.

                People like you are saying they have no responsibility whatsoever.

                .......I think you are the crazy one.

                1. Pcunix profile image90
                  Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  They HAVE to reject this.

                  Only about 30% of the country shares their views.  That's powerful when everyone else is fractured and unable to agree, but when big crap like this happens, they see that most of us will unite against them, so they dig in their heels hard.

                  It's sad, because in their hearts they know it is wrong. But they can't give in.

                  1. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Let me give what is a cite instead of just pulling numbers out of thin air...

                    "Conservatives Now Outnumber Liberals in All 50 States, Says Gallup Poll"

                    http://www.cnsnews.com/node/52602

                2. John Holden profile image59
                  John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  What those who take the stance that it is crazy to say people are influenced by rhetoric and images are saying is that advertising doesn't work.
                  As advertising is a multi billion industry it patently does work and therefore those saying that violent rhetoric and images do not work are themselves stupid and crazy.

                3. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  1) errr...mom... if YOU make an assertation it is up to YOU to prove it is right. It is no one's responsibility to prove you are wrong.  Typical backwards thinking.

                  2) You mean all those demonstrations started by Democrat wife, Tipper Gore, wife of Democrat VP Al Gore, who was the Democrate candidate for president?

                  3) You, or anyone else, have yet to make ANY association between this killer and ANY political advertising, radio programming, or other communication.

                  4) Isn't it fasicinating how the "people" (does "people = everyone in the universe) you want to cite never, ever, seem in the least bit upset or complaining about the dems use of violent, graphic imagry that induces violent behaviour in out of control people.  They only seem to complain about the republicans. Fasicinating, I say. Fasicinating.

                  1. lovemychris profile image79
                    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    1.) I already told you...I believe anything until proven other-wise. You cannot prove their words and images did not cause harm, ergo--I say they did!!

                    2.) No, actually, the outrage was started by President HW Bush and Vice President Quayle, who had a news conference to denounce the song!

                    3.) Fox News contributor Mara Liasson said Sunday that while defending use of gun imagery, Fox News employee Sarah Palin actually admitted that political discourse can cause violence.
                    "Here she is saying, when you talk about blood libel, that is the definition political discourse, a manufactured lie causing violence," noted Liasson. "In this case she paints herself as the potential victim."
                    "Here she is agreeing with the left that political discourse can cause violence."

                    Not to mention a 63 yr old man who was shot, and blames the Tea-Party rhetoric of "second amendment remedies".

                    4.) There is just no comparison with what Palin, Angle and Bachmann-Turner-Overdrive are doing....none.

              2. junko profile image79
                junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Jack you lock the door I can't get In.

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Junko... i just asked you to rephrase the question 'cause I wasn't sure what it was you were looking for.

                  1. junko profile image79
                    junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Jack I'm sorry about the misunderstanding on both our parts. My bad. Earlier I agreed with lovemychris when I was warn to not go in crazy territory. The comments I made was based on my personal feelings. The comments were not fact base. I agreed with chris that comments base on feeling and not facts could always be attacked as crazy. I asked If you agreed with that fact. I also stated the fact that its not what you believe, but what you can prove that counts. I asked, what do you think?

  35. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Thanks for coming to my defense, Jeff
    It appears sarcasm goes over some people's heads.

  36. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    That's a good point, John.
    However, it's not all that uncommon to have parents of different parties. I did.
    Dad was Republican
    Mom came from a diehard New Hampshire Democrat family.

    I think some young people veer to the opposite party from their parents as part of their individuation.
    Not all, of course.

    1. John Holden profile image59
      John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Of course that's just as bad as following them.

  37. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    True. The important thing is to THINK and UNDERSTAND the value propositions of the party you follow and the candidates running for office.
    No wonder so many voters are going Independent.

  38. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Just curious, PC (or anyone who has an answer).
    What would a "crazed left-winger" advocate anyway?

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
      Ralph Deedsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Embryonic stem cell research; single payer national health care; effective control of the manufacture, sale and ownership of handguns, and other non-sport firearms; cut the defense budget; close tax loopholes for corporations and high income Americans; remove the cap on earnings subject to Social Security tax; end the war in Afghanistan as soon as practically possible; sign the international treaty banning land mines and cluster bombs; spend more on education and less on weapons; end the war on drugs, emphasizing treatment rather than incarceration; increase international cooperation to deal with terrorism, piracy, disease and hunger; quit talking about climate change and start doing something about it, for starters.

      1. Pcunix profile image90
        Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        No, that's pretty much a normal liberal. Outrageous to the TeaParty crowd, of course, but not crazed.

      2. Jeff Berndt profile image92
        Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        What are you, Ralph? Some kind of socialist/fascist? smile

    2. Pcunix profile image90
      Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Pure socialism, perhaps. Eugenics?

      You'd need to get that far out to be as whacky as the far right.

  39. 61
    wildcat100posted 5 years ago

    you don't take LESSONS

  40. 61
    wildcat100posted 5 years ago

    !

  41. Randy Godwin profile image94
    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago

    Jill said "I think the cat crapped on the floor." 

    Jack tasted of it and said "it is, don't step in it."

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      And ~that's~ the best he can do, eh...

      Pitiful... just pitiful. But typical.

  42. 60
    10=10posted 5 years ago

    how do you make that snake apper

    1. Randy Godwin profile image94
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Ask Jack, he knows everything.  Don't believe it?  He'll tell you so himself!  DOH!


      But just in case you are not worthy of his notice, you can go here:smile

      http://planetsmilies.net/

      1. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I don't have to know "Everything". Just more than you. And that is easily done by most anyone.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image94
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          And now you know how much "most anyone" knows compared to me?  Wow!  Are you sure you're not god?  smile

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Found you can't really find any traction on the subject of the thread, eh. Not anything of value you can post so you're going to attempt to make it about me. Okay... but the Dear Readers see the bankruptcy of what you are doing. Totally void of ideas.

            1. Randy Godwin profile image94
              Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Oh, it's not about you?  LOL!  You deign to condescend and speak for your imaginary supporters with laughable smugness and superiority and it's not about you?  HAHAHA! 

              Come on, tell me again how superior you are.  Or,  tell me what others think about you, that would be even funnier. smile

              1. Jack Burton profile image81
                Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                As susupected... still nothing to add to the discussion since you've been shot down (parden the expression)on anything you've attempted to say about it.

                Go ahead and discuss me some more... while everyone wonders why you don't have anything of real value to add.

                1. Randy Godwin profile image94
                  Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  "Everyone"  LOLOLOL  Stop it Jack, your killing me!  LOLOL! smile




                  Okay, this has been a hoot.  Just let Jack talk people.  There's no need to say anything more on this thread.  Just listen and he will tell you everything you need to think.  Later on "we"!  LOL!

                  1. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    You do have something of value to add to the discussion, don't you? Oh... you don't?

                    Everyone sees that.

                  2. Jack Burton profile image81
                    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes, I will tell you everything... snicker.

                    And the Dear Readers notice that I give multiple sources for multiple thoughts on the subject and randy gives... well, he gives comments about ME as his best he can offer. :-)

              2. Pcunix profile image90
                Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Oh, I can think of at least six or more regulars here who probably think he is simply brilliant.

                A lot of eagles, flags and crosses plus some very angry looking faces. All people that I really admire in a fascinated and near mesmerized sort of way.  Well, I'm not sure "admire" is quite the word I need.

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  A shame you're offended by eagles, flags and crosses.

                  1. Pcunix profile image90
                    Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    I am, actually.  They have come to symbolize a mindset I find quite abhorrent. 

                    But it is helpful - when we see the symbols, we do know just what to expect.

    2. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      You mean this one ~ ~ ~ ~?

  43. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Of all the people who read my post about giving semiautomatic weapons to mentally disturbed people, you are the only one who even remotely thought I was serious. Most people who know my writing got the point.

    Value of contribution is in the eye/mind of the beholder. I probably don't need to point out that more than 1500 hubbers have found sufficient value in my writing to become followers. So when you insult me, you insult them.

    And by the way, the correct spelling of the word as you have used it in the above sentence is "role" not "roll."

    But I see we're already back to calling other hubbers "son" and denigrating their posts with "that's the best he can do."
    And you wonder why people can't take you seriously?

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I never said I took it “seriously”. I just said it was the best you could do. I also called it inane which is not a synonym for serious.

      A “hub counter” eh. Are you going to drag out your fifth grade gold stars next?

      I am soooo glad that you feel absolutely confident that you can speak for every single one of those supposed 1500 hubbers to know that they feel “insulted.” Such a might super power. I can see where you get your name.

      Are you speaking for all the “people” in the universe when you post “people.” Or are you using it to mean all the people on Hubpages. Or “all the rightminded people who think exactly like I do.” Because if you are using it to mean ~anyone~ other than yourself then Randy is going to get you…

    2. Jeff Berndt profile image92
      Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Just take some advice from the Pork Chop Express on a dark and stormy night. When some wild-eyed, eight-foot-tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head up against the barroom wall, and he looks you crooked in the eye and he asks you if ya paid your dues, you just stare that big sucker right back in the eye, and you remember what ol' Jack Burton always says at a time like that: "Have ya paid your dues, Jack?" "Yessir, the check is in the mail."

      1. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Now ~this~ is "third person" speak. You paying attention, Mom?

  44. Jack Burton profile image81
    Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago

    From that notorius rightwing rag, The New Republic...

    "How the Media Botched the Arizona Shooting"

    The dominant storyline in the press—one that persisted in the face of all the facts—was that right-wing hysteria and lunacy had given rise to Loughner’s atrocity. Only on Wednesday night, when President Obama delivered a speech that effectively told everyone to cut it out, was the stampede halted (one hopes). But it’s still worth reviewing how the nation’s leading periodicals descended into such mindlessness.

    Let’s go back to this Saturday. When news of the incident first broke, bloggers began to speculate that this was a Tea Party-related incident. No evidence of that emerged. Once a little more information trickled out, The New York Times and other outlets linked Loughner to a far-right publication called American Renaissance. That likewise had no basis in fact. Over the next day or two, as Loughner turned out to give off numerous indications of mental illness but very few of right-wing ideology, the dominant analysis became, “Okay maybe this guy was nuts, but, still, he was at least indirectly a product of a climate of political hysteria.”

    http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/814 … a-shooting

    1. Pcunix profile image90
      Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Well, you know how it is: when you see one nut, you automatically think that it probably came from the sack that is full of them.

      1. Jack Burton profile image81
        Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Hey, if the media failing to inform and making a fool of themselves is okay with you it's certianly okay with me.

        1. Pcunix profile image90
          Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Hey, it works for Fox, doesn't it?

          1. Jack Burton profile image81
            Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Funny the article about meida malfeasance didn't mention fox at all, eh.

  45. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    I am not a right-minded person.
    I am a left-minded person!

    Apparently, you believe you are the only one who has anything of value or can gain traction on this thread.
    You are the one making it all about you.
    You want to own this thread so badly? Go right ahead.
    You're only talking to yourself anyway lol

    1. Jack Burton profile image81
      Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Seems YOU responded, eh

      And just what have you added of "value" to the discussion other than to want to give guns to the mentally disturbed.

  46. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    PC -- That's what I thought, too.
    It's pretty hard to picture a whole "movement" of "rabid extreme left-wingers" isn't it? There is no rallying cry that would mobilize the left fringe the way God & Guns mobilize the right.

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
      uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      "Workers of the world unite.  All you have to lose is your chains."  Left wing radicals have torn whole societies up by the roots and left the streets choked with the bodies of the innocent more than once in the last century.  It may not have happened in the US - unless your are a scab crossing a picket line - yet.

  47. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    PC -- are you saying you've got a crush on Brenda? lol

    1. Pcunix profile image90
      Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No, that's not the right word.

      I do sometimes read her words and feel awe, though.

  48. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Yes, UCV, that is true.
    Internationally it's easy to cite examples on both sides -- left-wing and right-wing dictatorships, communistic countries, etc.
    But with the system we have in the US I don't think that could ever happen.

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
      uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      So we are angels?  So is that what is meant by American exceptionalism?  I am still not sure what liberals mean by right wing?  There can be no conservative dictatorship - it is contradictory.  There can, however, be liberal dictatorship since it has already happened more than once in history.

      1. Pcunix profile image90
        Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The dictatorship we worry abut from the right wing is that of corporate rule.

      2. Jeff Berndt profile image92
        Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        "There can be no conservative dictatorship - it is contradictory."

        How does that follow?

        1. John Holden profile image59
          John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I wondered how that could be as well.

          1. Pcunix profile image90
            Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Because they hate Federal rule so much.

            They love local rule though. Laws against blacks, homosexuals. Laws that put people in their place with none of that liberal "rights" stuff.  That's what Home Rule has always done best. Little local dictators, company stores, local pollution, local zoning to keep the undesirables where they belong.

            It's all good. But that durn Federal stuff is wrong.

            1. Jack Burton profile image81
              Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Hmmm... I seem to remember that ALL those Jim Crow laws against the blacks were put into place and kept by Democrats. That's why I love my liberals friends so much... I know they are so ignorant of real history.

              1. Pcunix profile image90
                Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                As we have already seen, you are easily confused by labels.

                The laws were made by Conservatives, whatever party label they stitched into their hat brims.

                There are Conservative Democrats even today. We had Joe Liebermann as a cross to bear, for one, and there are others.

                The divide is not Repubs and Dems, Jack, it is right wing conservativism against those of us who value individual rights.  Your imaginary nonsense about collectivism has nothing to do with it either, but of course you are required to sing that song, so sing it you will.

                Liberals believe in people. Conservatives believe in control. Corporate control, home rule control. And as close to anarchy as they can get without burning their feathers.

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Hmmmm....collectivism is a left wing ideal.

                  And in some ways you've stumbled into a semi-valid point although you have it wrong in many ways. It really isn't about labels... republican, democrat, conservative, liberal, or any other.

                  It is two completely separate philosophies. Those who want to have control to rule others... and those who just want to have others leave him alone as he leaves others alone.

                  both parties are infested far too much with the first kind of people, although the new-liberal mantra supports it much more than the conservatives do.

                  1. Pcunix profile image90
                    Pcunixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Liberals are not interested in socialism or any ism.

                    We are interested in freedom. Not freedom only for white Christians, but freedom for all. We look for fairness, and as it is unfortunately true that a greedy few will spoil the pot, we look to control with laws. We aren't interested in interfering with your life at all: we only want to interfere with those who abuse other people.

                    We don't want to destroy capitalism, but we do want to fence it in so that it cannot abuse. We want safe working conditions and safe products. 

                    It shouldn't be such a horrible thing to want, but you conservatives always see it that way.

              2. Ralph Deeds profile image68
                Ralph Deedsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                True the Jim Crow laws were passed by ignorant, prejudiced Southern Democrats, who long ago were replaced by ignorant, prejudiced, red neck Republicans thanks to the GOP's southern strategy.

                1. Jack Burton profile image81
                  Jack Burtonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Democrats, Ralph? My, my...

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    You're really having trouble keeping up aren't you?

                2. junko profile image79
                  junkoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  And blue and yellow dog democrats

            2. John Holden profile image59
              John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              It didn't prevent us from having for too many years a right wing conservative as a virtual dictator.

        2. uncorrectedvision profile image61
          uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          read Russel Kirk's The Conservative Mind or anything by Edmund Burke.

  49. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    UCV.
    1. Angels, certainly not! Humans!
    2. Yes, that could be American's exceptionalism. Her system of government will not permit dictatorship.
    3. Are you saying we have had liberal dictatorship in the US? Under who?

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
      uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Not here, not yet.  We came very close, to the continued burden on our culture, during the New Deal and the Great Society.

  50. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    FDR and LBJ as American dictators.
    Interesting concept.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image94
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      And very telling too, your Eliteness!  smile

    2. uncorrectedvision profile image61
      uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Dictatorship isn't necessarily by individuals.  Dictatorship by organizations is far more common with an individual at the head of the "party."  I said close. I did not call them dictators.

 
working