jump to last post 1-17 of 17 discussions (162 posts)

Loughner hated Giffords before the Tea Party and Palin:

  1. habee profile image89
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    This from the Washington Post, which endorsed Obama for POTUS:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpa … _befo.html

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      WaPo endorsed Obama, but Thiessen didn't. He was "senior policy adviser to Jesse Helms, chief speech writer for Rumsfeld and was a member of George W. Bush's speech writing team.

      Thiessen lives in Alexandria, Virginia with his wife Pamela, who is currently the Staff Director of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, and their four children.[2]
      [edit] Career

      Thiessen has worked in Washington for many years, starting with five years at Black, Manafort, Stone and Kelly. He spent six years (1995–2001) on Capitol Hill as spokesman and senior policy advisor to Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms (R-NC).[3] He joined the Bush administration as Chief Speechwriter for Donald Rumsfeld in 2001, then moved to Bush's speechwriting team in 2004.[3] In February 2008, he became chief speechwriter when William McGurn resigned. [4]

      In March 2009, Thiessen and Peter Schweizer opened Oval Office Writers LLC.[5]

      Thiessen is currently a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is also a columnist for The Washington Post, starting March 2010.

      Habee, have you joined the Tea Party claque. Shame on you!

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Glad you pointed this out, Ralph.  Just because the Post supported Obama doesn't mean the writer did.

      2. habee profile image89
        habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Nope, Ralph - I just like the truth. I still don't like the vitriol. So are you saying that the writer made the story up? And the Post, a Pulitzer-Prize winning paper, just went along with it? What am I missing here?

        Ralph, if this story is true, I'm disappointed with your comment. That would make it seem that you want to stifle the facts unless they support your argument.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          So it makes no difference who says things or their close connections to the party under scrutiny?  Great, I can use this in future posts.  smile

          1. habee profile image89
            habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Go read CBS News. Or are they too "right" for you, too?

            1. Randy Godwin profile image93
              Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              There are right and left writers in most newspapers and on television news shows.  I do take in consideration the writer's or speaker's political affiliations when I read or hear their opinions.  You don't?

              1. habee profile image89
                habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                That's why I didn't use FOX as a source. I figure if all the other sources I noted say the same thing, there must be some validity to it.

          2. habee profile image89
            habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Sure, Randy. I added ABC and MSNBC, so feel free to use their counterparts - FOX and Rush.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              They are hardly counterparts of Fox and Rush. There is no comparison between the clowns on Fox and Limbaugh with any other commentators.

              1. habee profile image89
                habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I've never listened to Rush, so I retract that. But I equate Beck with Olbermann. I have heard both spew hate. To Keith's credit, he admits it and has apologized.

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image70
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          By your post you are implicitly defending the Tea Party's outrageous rhetoric. Whether or not Loughner was influenced directly or indirectly by the vitriolic climate in Arizona an d the country is an open question. But the pernicious contribution of the Tea Party and the men behind its curtain is not. The fact that the Washington Post published Thiessen's op-ed doesn't prove anything either way. It just shows that the paper is willing to give space on its editorial page to a right-wing partisan. Notice that he didn't say anything about the date that Loughner scrawled his death threat on the 2008 letter. He may well have done it on the day he received it or at some later date after brooding about the alleged slight he felt at Giffords' voter meeting.

          1. habee profile image89
            habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            My point was that he had a beef with Giffords BEFORE the TP and Palin. Maybe their rhetoric fanned the flames. Who knows what goes on in the mind of a loon?

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              And what goes on in the minds of ordinary, ignorant people who are exposed over and over to wild claims about Obama and Democrats.

              1. habee profile image89
                habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Where did I make wild claims about Obama??

          2. profile image61
            C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            No she isn't Ralph. Talk about non sequitors! She NEVER made such a comment, implicitly or explicitly. However, your statements ARE implying that the TP is responsible. A statement that has no basis in reality.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I'm not implying anything more than that the Tea Party has been a major contributor to the climate of hatred that has infected the country since Obama was elected president.

              1. habee profile image89
                habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                And I agree with that.

              2. profile image61
                C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                In my opinion they are not the source, but a product of not hate, but anger. It's the economy! It's out of controll spending by the government. It's republican's caving into lobyist. It happens EVERY TIME Ralph. You know that.
                You are a self proclaimed "Yellow Dog Democrat Liberal" your words, not mine. You saw in Obama the promise of all your beliefs becoming reality. You see the TP as a roadblock to that. Therefore your angry with them. Your anger isn't totally without merit. The signs, the statements those are real. Those are not healthy. However, they are still just words. They are not the foundation of the TP. Smaller government is. Something you would be opposed to anyway.

        3. Doug Hughes profile image60
          Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Habee - there's a mix here. The writer you cite IS partisan - a LOT partisan. You characterized him as impartial by saying the editorial was in the WaPo. That's what Ralph was objecting to.

          I suspect it's true that the shooter obsessed over the Giffords for years before the Tea Party emerged. That doesn't negate what Ralph and I (and others) have been saying. The culture of hate and violence from the Tea Party is poisoning politics and ruining any hope of bipartisan progress on issues.  It's significant to my argument that the shooter may have simmered for years but didn't hit the boiling point BEFORE the Tea Party hit the scene.

          1. habee profile image89
            habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Hi, Doug. But after Ralph pointed out that the writer was partisan, I listed many other sources that said the same thing.

            I don't like the hate and violence, either - from Dems or Reps. And yes, as I have said, we see more from the right now. When Bush was in office, we saw more from the left.

          2. profile image61
            C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Doug, I'll say this. You've proven that some of the Tea Party Rhetoric is over the top. However, they are not the ones poisoning politics. Lobyist are. Special intrest are. The Tea Party represents unsophisticated anger at it's worst and sensible small government at it's best.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              The Tea Party is being fueled behind the scenes by big money lobbyists like Dick Armey and political contributors like the Koch brothers and the guy who founded Spectator and the efforts to smear Clinton (his name escapes me).

              Also, Rupert Murdoch's Fox News and his people like Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh and O'Reilly plus radio talk show hosts like Mark Levin are continually spewing lies and vitriol. (I'm not saying some of it is coming from the left as well, but I'll leave it up to someone else to point the finger in that direction.)

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Mellon-Scaife?

                1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
                  Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes. Thanks. As somebody said he's a "loathsome rat."

                  http://hubpages.com/hub/Richard-Mellon- … ic-Justice

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    "Here are the names of just a few of the people, publications and organizations who fully and actively participated in the very real vast right-wing conspiracy to destroy the Clintons:

                    Richard Mellon Scaife, the Arkansas Project, Larry Nichols, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Cliff Jackson, David Brock, Ken Starr, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., The American Spectator, Troopergate, Gary Aldrich, Ted Nugent, Alfred Regnery, Regnery Publishing, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Christopher Ruddy, Council for National Policy, CNP, David Hale, Jim McDougal, Rush limbaugh, Joseph Farah, Western Journalism Center, WJC, Pittsburgh Tribune, Jeremiah Flms, Reed Irvine, Accuracy in Media, Bob Dornan, Susan Carpenter McMillan, Juanita Broaddrick, Insight Magazine, Paul Rodriguez, Washington Times and Reverend Sun Myung Moon"


                    http://rackjite.com/web/right-wing_conspiracy.htm

              2. profile image61
                C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Dick Armey is just "co-opting" jumping on the band wagon if you will. The rest you mention are simply making money off of the issues of the day. Nothing new there. Lets get down to the issues Ralph. It's coruption plain and simple. The money of the lobyist and special interest are trumping the will of the people. That's clear, no matter what side of the political spectrum your on. If that weren't so, why do candidates chances of victory so often expressed in their ability to raise money?

                1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
                  Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Well, we're not too far apart on the lobbyists. Campaign finance reform is badly needed. One answer is shorter government-financed campaigns at the national, state and local level.

                  My understanding is that Dick Armey did more than jump on the Tea Party bandwagon.

      3. habee profile image89
        habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Ralph, here you "pooh-poohed" the piece from the Post, implying that it was just the rantings of a partisan. The same story appears on CBS, Bloomberg, Business Week, WSJ, ABC, NY Post, Tucson Citizen, and NY Daily News. MSNBC also reports the "die b**ch" note, but they neglected to mention the letter Loughner received from Giffords in 2007. You were being disingenuous by implying that the story wasn't true.

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I don't believe I "impied" any such thing. All I was saying was that the story doesn't excuse the crap that's been coming from the Tea Party, talk radio hosts and Fox News clowns and liars.

          1. lady_love158 profile image59
            lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            LOL! All the hate speech I see is from the left everytime someone doesn't agree with them!

            What was it Obama said... "if they bring a knife we'll bring a gun"

            "We have to punish our enemies"


            Yeah No hate speech on the left! Hypocrites!

  2. profile image0
    ralwusposted 6 years ago

    A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.

  3. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    "[T]wo law enforcement sources said that FBI agents had found a 2007 letter from Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) to the shooting suspect, with the words "Die, bitch" and "Die, cops" scrawled on it."

    A letter FROM Giffords TO the suspect??? This guy can't even report it right!

    So now we're supposed to apologize to Palin, it that it?
    For all that hate she has spewed for years?
    All that "Real" America, "He pals around with terrorists", "Don't re-treat, Re-Load" ,"liberals are your enemy" talk?

    No thanks.
    Keep justifying it all you like.....

    The hate that the far right has spewed all over the airwaves does not get a pass.
    Which,btw---hasn't ended yet. Someone please let me know if it ever does.

    1. WalterDamage profile image59
      WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Since when is stating facts considered "hate"?

      Barack Obama began his political career in the living room of Bill Ayers, a well known domestic terrorist.  And he spent twenty years sitting under the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who spewed hatred for white people from the pulpit virtually every Sunday.

      And politicians from both sides of the aisle routinely use military jargon in political events.  "Targeting" certain areas or opponents, even the term "campaign" is a military term.

      But of course, to the left, any dialogue from the right will always be considered "hate".  It's the term to use when you in fact have no argument..

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "Bill Ayers, a well known domestic terrorist."

        When Obama met him Ayers was

        A retired professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, formerly holding the titles of Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar.[3]

        CJ you and Habee are masters of the non sequitur and the art of obfuscation.

        1. WalterDamage profile image59
          WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Perhaps you can point me to a single quote where the inimitable Mr. Ayers has demonstrated any regret or remorse for his terrorist activities.

          Then again....

        2. tony0724 profile image61
          tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          A retired professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, formerly holding the titles of Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar.[3

          I guess now they give degrees for hate speech

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            To quote your fellow believer, "But of course, to the left, any dialogue from the right will always be considered "hate".  It's the term to use when you in fact have no argument.."

        3. profile image61
          C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ralph, please provide examples. You have made this comment before and then when I challenged you. You back tracked. What Habee and I often endorse is moderation. Plain and simple. What we often endorse is that people NOT fall into the "THIS OR THAT FALLACY" argument that you claim to dislike. Apparently this time around you are insisting that Habee and I pick a side, the extreme left or the extreme right. No thank you. Name call all you want, it's simply an abstraction and shows that you have NO valid argument to make.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You do pick sides. You are on the right.
            Pretending to be fair and balanced, while constantly throwing jabs at Obama and Democrats.
            Never can you say, Oh that's wrong, without saying yeah, but look what Obama did.

            So OK....tell me which Democrat holds a rally and says "either we win by ballot, or we win by bullets."

            And tell me it's fine to feel that way.
            Then tell me how outraged you are about a Black Panther holding a stick.

            Then tell me you approve of Hagee and Parsley, racist men of the cloth. While outraged about Wright.

            YOU are NOT victims of society because we have a black president!!!!

            1. lady_love158 profile image59
              lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I would think any decent American would be outraged by the intimidation of voters by those black panthers, and more so by the Justice depatment's REFUSAL to see prosecution simply because they are black! What happened to equality under the law? The left wants to make exceptions?

              1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                How much did you bitch about all of the voter intimidation and manipulation in the Florida fiasco during the Gore/Bush election, LaLo?  You know, black citizens sent to the wrong voting precincts, missing names on voter rolls, cops blocking roads leading to voting places, etc.

                I bet you really got ticked about this type of stuff, right?  LOL!  And similar stuff happened in Ohio during the Kerry/Bush election.  Ever heard of the Texas hit squad?  smile

                1. WalterDamage profile image59
                  WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Um, dude.  Bush won.  Bush WON.  Bush.  Won.

                  Oh, did I mention that Bush WON the election?

                  And it gets better....he did it twice.

                  Man, I wish were George Bush and could warrant this level of recognition for years after I ceased to be relevant....

                  1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
                    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Bush stole both elections, one with the help of the crooked vote counting in Florida and the help of the Supreme Court and the second with the Swift Boater liars financed by big oil money.

                2. lady_love158 profile image59
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I think there's abuses in every election and I think it should be dealt with by our justice department! That is fundamental to our system. Do you really think I would condone voter intimidation and fraud just to win an election???

                  Well if you do you're WRONG!

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                    Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    So you did speak out against the corruption and were dismayed when Bush got the nod in Florida and Ohio because of it, is that your answer?

                  2. Jim Hunter profile image61
                    Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Of course they would be wrong, but they don't care about that.

                    They will continue to tell lies until someone believes it.

                    Its the democrat way.

                    Poor Habee try's and try's to be nice to the libs and this is what she gets.

                    "CJ you and Habee are masters of the non sequitur and the art of obfuscation."

                    Why bother pointing out facts?

                    Its useless.

            2. profile image61
              C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Pick sides? Ok, I pick the middle. What I try to do is connect the dots for people. When two sides are locked in an unending argument it is usually because they can't or won't see the others perspective. That is what happens in a lot of these forums. I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. I only hope that I can put things in a way that can more easily be received.

          2. habee profile image89
            habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Thank you, CJ.

            1. profile image61
              C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              No problem Habee, your very welcome.

          3. Ralph Deeds profile image70
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            C.J., trying to smear President Obama by association with Ayers, claiming him a terrorist because of some youthful mistakes 50 years before Obama met him and because he attended the church whose pastor sometimes went over the line is hardly a contribution to "moderation."

            1. lady_love158 profile image59
              lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Ayers never apologized in fact quite the opposite, he refuses to apologize for his past.

              1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
                Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                How do you know Ayres never apologised? So what if he didn't? What does that have to do with President Obama?

                1. profile image61
                  C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  ”I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said. ”I feel we didn’t do enough.”

                  So you believe it's ok to consort with unrepented terrorist? If you or I did that, we'd be on a "WATCH LIST".

                  1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
                    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Source, please? When and where did he say that?

                  2. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Do Bush and Cheney regret torture?

                2. lady_love158 profile image59
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I believe Ayers is on the record for justifying the use of bombs in the early days of the SDS. Hey this is Obama's friend! Some say he actually wrote at least one of Obama's books. Maybe if this was Obama's only radical friend you could just dismiss it but Obama's administration is full of radicals. Okay so what does that mean? I don't know, maybe nothing, but I have a funny feeling if it was Bush's admin full of these people the left wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it.

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Bush Daddy was in bed with Saddam! Remember that picture of Rumsfeld shaking his hand?
                    Saudi Arabia too....Bush Junior was big time with them.
                    Let's see...what was Saudi Arabia know for?.........Oh Yeah!! Sharia Law and those schools,where they teach hatred of America!!!

              2. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yet, you admire Palin for sticking to her guns,

                Don't think that calling for armed  insurrection is as dangerous as a man with a stick,

                And refuse to take responsibilty for hate-speech leading to violence.


                Hate speech leads to violence. There is proof. Tell your party to stop using it. (Tea?)

                Well, at least one good thing...the tea-party has given me new-found respect for Republicans!!

            2. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Thank YOU!

            3. profile image61
              C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              When did I do that? If you read these post correctly, you will see that I made NO mention of this. By the way, planning bombings is NOT "youthfull mistakes". But then we are off topic aren't we? Your original repsponse was well thought out Ralph. SO was Habee's response. Your argument was that Marc Theisen is definitely a right leaning columnist. Therefore the conclusion drawn in the article will be supportive of right leaning thinking, I would agree. Habee responded that while that may be true, the enviroment he is in is not completely right leaning. In fact the paper officially endorsed Obama. That is the topic Ralph.

            4. Jim Hunter profile image61
              Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              "Trying to smear President Obama by association with Ayers, claiming him a terrorist because so some youthful mistakes 50 years before Obama met him and because he attended the church whose pastor sometimes went over the line is hardly a contribution to "moderation."

              Jared Loughner made a youthful mistake last Saturday, maybe you should give him a hug Ralph.

              Setting off bombs is not a "youthful mistake" its terrorism.

              Obama doesn't need help in being smeared, his incompetence does a very nice job of it.

          4. Ralph Deeds profile image70
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I apologise. I mistakenly attributed Walter Damage's comment smearing Obama with Ayers and the Rev. Wright  to you.

            1. WalterDamage profile image59
              WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Wait a minute...how is it smearing Obama with Ayers when, according to the left, Ayers has nothing to apologize for?  He's a distinguished professor, after all.

              I would think you'd want Obama mentioned in the same sentence.  Make up your collective minds....

            2. profile image61
              C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I figured as much. I thought it best to let you come to your own conclusions. Here is the Ayers link by the way. It's from our favorite paper:

              http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/11/books … -with.html

              1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
                Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Thanks. I doubt seriously that Obama agrees with any of that. As I recall Ayers and Obama served together on some board and that Ayers may have made suggestions to Obama on his campaign. Obama has nothing to be ashamed of wrt Ayers or Wright despite all the cackling from the GOP.

    2. profile image61
      C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      "A letter FROM Giffords TO the suspect??? This guy can't even report it right!"

      Yes that is correct. Loughner went to a "congressman on your corner" meeting in 07, he signed a registry and did receive a letter from Giffords thanking him for his attendance. He scrawled "Die B!tch" and "Die Cops" on the letter and kept it in his safe.

  4. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    Here's a challenge for all of you who think the far right media is blameless.....
    Listen to Right talk radio for a week.
    I don't know where you live, but here in Mass, it's on from 5:30 am until 1:00am.....total right-wing radio.
    Just listen to it for a week, and see how you feel about the world, about Democrats, about Obama.....please, just do it!
    Then you will begin to understand.

    It's pure hate.

    1. WalterDamage profile image59
      WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Nope, it's disagreement.

      Did you consider Air America to be "hate" when they were on the air during the Bush years?  I'm betting you didn't, even when host Randi Rhoades used gunshot sound effects when talking about how Bush needed to be dealt with...

      1. thisisoli profile image54
        thisisoliposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Interesting, I have only been in the US long enough to hear right wing propoganda radio, if the right wing view the left wing radio as atrocious as the right wing radio sounds now though, maybe you guys need to start afresh with politics.

        Hate radio only breeds hate, politics should breed debate.

    2. KFlippin profile image61
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Nothing is stopping the left wing from yakking on radio......darn, could it be that the right wing has Americas ear, that perhaps they are the ones who work the most and spend all that time hitting the road and earning or looking for an income, THE radio audience.  Those on the continuous public dole have better things to do than listen to radio, like go blind watching crap on tv during the day, they have zero at stake the way they see it.  IMO.

      And the purest hate I see now and have seen for several years is squarely in the lefty citizens of this country.  And I really got quite a lot of chuckles over your renewal of the tired *Right Wing Conspiracy against the Clintons notion, lots of chuckles, so thanks for that, needed those chuckles tonight.

      1. John Holden profile image61
        John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So, the right wing work the most! You must be joking, they like nothing better than getting other people to work for them for less than a living wage!

        1. KFlippin profile image61
          KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          *........they like nothing better than getting other people to work for them for less than a living wage!*

          That would be a left wing party line they hope a majority of voters, a majority of the world, believe...........

          1. John Holden profile image61
            John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Funny, I thought that it was largely the right wing who opposed the minimum wage!

  5. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    I'm going to post something said on my local blog this a.m.
    I know it will go in one ear and out the other, but wht, give it the old college try:

    "When conservatives claim that their rhetoric isn’t more explosive than the Left’s they remind me of the Cold War. If you're conservative & over 45, you know exactly what I mean.

    Back then, many liberals claimed that the U.S. was just as bad as the USSR. You remember the drill: You say Prague, they say Bay of Pigs. You say Iron Curtain (ALL of E. Europe lost for 2 generations) they say Chile.

    The Cold War US wasn’t lily white, but equating our transgressions with the truly monstrous acts of the Soviets was a joke. There’s a name for that kind of thinking: Moral Equivalence.

    That’s what conservatives do today. Anyone with ears knows that the Right’s rhetoric is much more explosive then the Left’s. But making that point to a conservative is like talking to a marshmallow-headed Cold War liberal. You mention Limbaugh, they give you Maddow. You mention Michele Bachman encouraging her constituents to be “armed and dangerous” they mention Obama saying don’t bring a knife to a gun fight.

    Today’s conservatives are just like Cold War liberals, and just as wrong."

    That fair and balanced enough?

  6. habee profile image89
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    Ralph, CBS reports that Loughner got mad at Giffords in 2007, but I guess you don't believe that, either. Perhaps if you'd read/watch something other than MSNBC and Huffpo, you'd get the whole picture. I'm still lost as to how to posting facts is obfuscation.

    I've always said that I'm right-of-center, but I don't approve of hate speech from either side. I also stated that in the past few years, more hate has been spewed from the right than the left. Liberals can't stand it because they can't pin this on the right. I'm not saying that some of the hate speech couldn't prompt violence - that's why it should stop. But in this case, it doesn't seem that Loughner was influenced by the rhetoric. He met Giffords in 2007 and asked her a question. Her answer made him mad. He's a nutjob and wanted revenge for his imagined injury. Add it up.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I have relatives in Tucson, and I've spent a fair amount of time there in recent years. The vitriolic atmosphere there started long before the Tea Party and has increased steadily as immigration issues heated up. I don't pretend to know what went on in Loughner's sick mind. I think it's wrong to exclude the influence of hateful speech that his sick mind has been exposed to or to claim that any one source pushed him over the edge or to exclude possible influences. Talk radio in Tucson is pretty hateful. The fact that Loughner may never have listened to the radio doesn't make Tucson talk radio any less hateful. Ditto for the Tea Party. The Thiessen op-ed that you so triumphantly posted was an effort to defend or exculpate the Tea Party in my opinion. It was written by someone who worked for Jesse Helms, not exactly an apostle of moderation, Rumsfeld and Bush who we can thank for the dumb Iraq war and bungled effort in Afghanistan, etc., etc.

      1. Jim Hunter profile image61
        Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "I don't pretend to know what went on in Loughner's sick mind."

        You have from day one pretended to know what was in his mind, don't run away from it now.

        Still have troops in Iraq and Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan and just this week told Karzai we would be there for as long as they needed us.

        Its Obama's war now, direct your anger appropriately.

      2. habee profile image89
        habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I'm not defending hate speech. I don't like it. But I don't like to point blame where it doesn't belong. You scoffed at the Post's piece, but didn't mention CBS. I'll say it again - the TP, Palin, and Beck could influence violence with their rhetoric. In Loughner's case, they didn't "plant the seed." Yes, they could have made it worse.

        Ralph, I want to ask you something else. Do you think Palin meant for people to actually go out and shoot her opponents with her map? Just wondering what you thought about this. I don't like the map, but I don't think she meant for people to actually go out and kill people. Some liberals do, and I wanted to know your thoughts.

  7. WalterDamage profile image59
    WalterDamageposted 6 years ago

    For all the vitriol over Palin's gun analogies and the infamous map, I'm wondering if people are just as up i arms over the fact that most political rhetoric is combative in nature.  Districts or opponents are routinely "targeted" and even the term "campaign" is taken from military slang.

    I'll bet if you poke around long enough you could  even find an incendiary word or two in Rep. Gifford's campaign lexicon.

    It seems that some of us are employing some selective editing in our outrage....

  8. katiem2 profile image57
    katiem2posted 6 years ago

    Thanks for bringing this to light Habee!  smile

  9. habee profile image89
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    Hi, Katie! You're welcome!

    1. katiem2 profile image57
      katiem2posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hi, how you and yours getting along this new year?

      1. habee profile image89
        habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Just trying to stay warm! How 'bout you?

  10. lady_love158 profile image59
    lady_love158posted 6 years ago

    http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/kn011411dAPR20110113034515.jpg

  11. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    It's so funny! Ayers was fighting back against a tyrannical gvt....just what you want to do now!

    1. profile image61
      C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So you think the current government is tyranical?

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No--YOU do.

        1. profile image61
          C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I DO? WOW....

    2. WalterDamage profile image59
      WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      But we aren't calling for violence to do it....just because you keep saying we do doesn't make it so.....

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Wow.....you have got to be kidding.......

        1. WalterDamage profile image59
          WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Nope, if you can look beyond campaign rhetoric and show me where a single candidate or elected official from the right has advocated taking up guns and physically injuring or murdering their opponents, I'd be glad to read it.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So if you advocate violence only during the campaign season that's okey dokey with you?  Interesting philosophy.

            1. WalterDamage profile image59
              WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I'm not aware of anybody advocating violence as a part of their campaign.  As has been demonstrated time and again, both sides utilize military terminology when describing various aspect of their runs for office.  No rational person believes that they are actually inciting real violence.

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                So "Second Amendment Solutions" refers to?

                1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I'd like to know this too, Ron!  Any helpers out there who knows?

                  1. habee profile image89
                    habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I know! I know! Pick me!

                    I don't know what else it could mean except a call for an armed uprising. And I'm "agin" it! I believe in debate, voting, and communicating with elected officials. I do all three. And yes, I own guns. I used to hunt a lot, and I once had to use a shotgun to defend myself, my home, and my three children from intruders. I don't, however, foresee ever taking it up against my fellow Americans.

                    Does the rhetoric need to be toned down? Absolutely. Bush is not Hitler, Obama is not a foreign-born communist, and Reagan was not the anti-Christ. Political rallies should not be a place where guns are allowed! Signs suggesting violence should also be banned. Posters that display Obama with a target on his head are unacceptable, just as the signs that appeared at Bush-bashing rallies that read, "I'm here to kill Bush" should be banned.

          2. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "taking up guns and physically injuring or murdering their opponents"

            Don't be foolish. Any one who did that would be arrested.

            But they do use phrases such as lock and load, don't re-treat...re-load, armed and dangerous, Obama wants to destroy America, take back OUR country,we are "real" Americans etc etc

            It fosters hate and the constant gun-imaging keeps it foremost in people's minds. Much like they do in movie theatres with food and drink...it's called subliminal messaging.

            Even Joe Scarborough says his mom watches Fox, and she thinks Obama hates white people and hates America and wants to kill her with Death Panels.
            Put that into the minds of angry people, along with gun slogans, gun images....it is a fire-keg waiting to explode.

            And I have NO DOUBT in my mind, they would kill me in an instant. I am liberal, and my grandson is black.....BOOOOM. Another piece of garbage bit the dust.

            1. habee profile image89
              habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I don't think we need the gun images, either - from Dem OR Repub candidates. There is a subliminal message that might seep into the brain of an unstable person. Can we all agree that neither side should use violent imagery?

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                What Democrat uses violent imagery?

                1. habee profile image89
                  habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Joe Manchin fired a gun in his campaign ads - not at a likeness of a person, but at a bill. I didn't like the "target your enemeies" map with the bullseyes that the Dems used, either.

                2. lady_love158 profile image59
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/1abortp2.jpg

                  http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/1apunch.jpg

                  http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/dusp.jpg

                  http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/dope.jpg


                  I hope this puts to bed the utter hypocrisy of the left!

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Where did that come from?
                    That is awful.

                  2. habee profile image89
                    habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I was hoping you'd show the "I'm here to kill Bush" signs. I don't know how to post images.

            2. WalterDamage profile image59
              WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              And NONE of the phrases you mentioned were designed to actually call people to take up arms.  And the whole "take our country back" is typically used by whichever party is out of power.   it is the Dems turn to us it next, and they will.

              Paranoid arguments should never be mistaken for genuine discourse...

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                So, once again....crosshairs aimed at people is innocent and not meant as kill kill kill?

                1. WalterDamage profile image59
                  WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Political parties have been "targeting" opponents and states for decades.....the argument is getting tiresome, love.....

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes--I agree. You refuse to take responsibility for your violence-prone Tea-Party rhetoric.

                    So be it, and reap whatever it is you are sowing.

            3. lady_love158 profile image59
              lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You mean like this from Obama"

              "When they bring a knife, we bring a gun,"
              "I'm the only guy between you and the pitchforks."

              OBAMA SEPTEMBER 17, 2008:  "I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors.  I want you to talk to 'em whether they are independent or whether they are Republican.  I want you to argue with them and get in their face."

              OBAMA MARCH 18, 2009:  "I don't want to quell anger.  I think people are right to be angry.  I'm angry!  What I want us to do, though, is channel our anger that constructive way."

              "If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying we're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us, if they don't see that kind of up surge in voting in this election, then I think it's gonna be harder, and that's why I think it's so important that people focus on voting on November 2nd."

              Talk of "kicking ass" and demonizing BP oil has led to a backlash from Great Britain, home country of the oil giant, while the rhetoric has also led to violence against BP facilities:
              http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 … at_bp.html

              Oh there is sooo much of this stuff from Obama and the left! Hypocrites! Liars! The liberals have no shame!

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, you are right. Liberals are the worst people on earth. Conservatives never do anything wrong.

                Silly of me for even thinking such a thing.

                1. lady_love158 profile image59
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Whew! Finally you see the error of your ways! LOL

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Unfortunately, we all will reap the error of yours.

              2. WalterDamage profile image59
                WalterDamageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The difference is that none of us are stupid enough to believe that Obama was calling for real, physical violence against political opponents.

                The more lucid among us can see that it is nothing more than political rhetoric.....

                1. lady_love158 profile image59
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  LOL! I know! It's ridiculous! Any normal person can see the context in which it was used. Same with the democrats use of targets on a map in 2004....but these foolish liberals INSIST on defending their use of that speech and those symbols while condemning the right for the same! The hypocrisy of the left is just beyond imagination!

              3. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Updated: 1:18 p.m. Federal and local authorities are investigating a severed gas line at the home of U.S. Rep. Tom Perriello’s brother, discovered the day after Tea Party activists posted the address online so opponents could “drop by” and “express their thanks” for Perriello’s vote in favor of health care reform.

                The gas line to the home’s propane tank was slashed, according to sources who spoke on condition of anonymity.

                The incident is being viewed as an attempted threat to a member of congress, sources said.

                Two members of the conservative Tea Party groups in Danville and Lynchburg posted the home’s address online, mistakenly believing it belonged to the congressman. The home actually belongs to Bo Perriello, the congressman’s older brother.

                The local FBI field office and the Albemarle County fire marshal are investigating the incident. Police have stepped up patrols in the area as well.

                Albemarle County spokeswoman Lee Catlin confirmed that county authorities are investigating an incident at Bo Perriello’s home in cooperation with the FBI, but she said she cannot comment on the specifics because it is an ongoing investigation.

                “The Fire Marshal’s Office is conducting the investigation in cooperation with the FBI,” Catlin said. “While officials are not willing to characterize the exact nature of the incident because of the ongoing investigation, it did not involve an immediate threat to occupants of the residence. Officials are taking the incident very seriously and conducting a vigorous investigation. Additional details will be released as the investigation continues.”

                M.A. Myers, a spokesman with the FBI’s Richmond field office, confirmed that the agency is “aware” of the severing of the gas line at Bo Perriello’s house.

                “At this point, all I can really confirm is that we are aware of that situation,” he said.

                Danville Tea Party leader Nigel Coleman was one of the two activists who posted Bo Perriello’s address online Monday.

                “This is Rep. Thomas Stuart Price Perriello’s home address,” Coleman wrote Monday. “… I ain’t holding back anymore!!”

                According to the Politico Web site, when Coleman learned that the address actually belonged to the congressman’s brother, he responded on a blog: “Do you mean I posted his brother’s address on my Facebook? Oh well, collateral damage.”

                1. lady_love158 profile image59
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  It sounds to me like someone from the left did this to denigrate the Tea Party, it's typical of their tactics. In any case there is NO evidence to tie that incident to the Tea Party.

              4. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I notice how you neglected to mention the US owns just as much of BP as Britain does.  Oversight?  LOL!

    3. habee profile image89
      habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So liberals thought this was good in the 60s, but not now?

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        See what I mean???? Why can't you answer it without turning it back on me?
        I asked first naneenaneebooboo

        But you see?? it's like if we say this is wrong...you say, yeah, but what about you.

        How come Bush could torture, Cheney could torture, you can get at Ayers for fighting against the gvt, but Palin putting crosshairs aimed at people is innocent as the snow?

        And yes, sometimes things are worth fighting for, but NO--violence is NEVER the answer.
        And I can only speak for me.

        1. habee profile image89
          habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I was using your exact same reasoning. I don't think either is acceptable.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Than please come out against it! Stop giving Palin a pass! That article you posted said we should apologize to her!

            I can't believe anyone would even think that way. It's so unbelievable to me.

            I am so depressed at the state of this country....

            1. habee profile image89
              habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I do not think we should apologize to Palin, but I don't think she's directly responsible for Loughner's actions. As I said on another post, Palin should have come out and apologized for her rhetoric and her crosshairs map. She should make her intentions clear to some of her rabid supporters instead of trying to play the victim. While I don't hold her responsible for the Az incident, I said it COULD be enough to push an unstable person over the edge in the future.

        2. profile image61
          C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You really should go back and read your post. This is ridiculous.

      2. Ralph Deeds profile image70
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Some liberals at the time. None that I know of now.

  12. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    And, are you really going to make me get the list? Cause I can.

  13. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    But this is too:

    Rep. Louise Slaughter has been at the center of the push for reform. Last Thursday she received a chilling recorded message at her campaign office. “Assassinate is the word they used…toward the children of lawmakers who voted yes.”

    Intersting that assasinate was used, and that is what Loughner said too.

    1. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Big deal! Palin has been getting all kinds of death threats as a result of the left's campaign to pin the blame of Giffords shooting on her! It's disgusting! All of it!

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Which all of it? The threats against Dems or Palin?

      2. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well, I googled and found out that a lot of Palin's death threats are due to her saying "blood libel", as well as the crosshairs.

        But this also popped up:

        "The Yee staffer, Adam Keigwin, said the detective told him investigators wanted to know about the death threats Yee received after he ruffled the feathers of Palin supporters by trying to uncover the details of the former GOP vice presidential candidate's speaking contract with a state university. Yee's office was flooded with graphic voice mails and faxes during the ordeal last spring, but he never faced a physical confrontation."

        hmmmm,so Palin was up to no good maybe? And someone who asked about it got death threats too.....what is this, thug-life?

  14. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    Have this one too:


    -- July 2008: A gunman named Jim David Adkisson, agitated at how "liberals" are "destroying America," walks into a Unitarian Church and opens fire, killing two churchgoers and wounding four others.

    -- October 2008: Two neo-Nazis are arrested in Tennessee in a plot to murder dozens of African-Americans, culminating in the assassination of President Obama.

    -- December 2008: A pair of "Patriot" movement radicals -- the father-son team of Bruce and Joshua Turnidge, who wanted "to attack the political infrastructure" -- threaten a bank in Woodburn, Oregon, with a bomb in the hopes of extorting money that would end their financial difficulties, for which they blamed the government. Instead, the bomb goes off and kills two police officers. The men eventually are convicted and sentenced to death for the crime.

    -- December 2008: In Belfast, Maine, police discover the makings of a nuclear "dirty bomb" in the basement of a white supremacist shot dead by his wife. The man, who was independently wealthy, reportedly was agitated about the election of President Obama and was crafting a plan to set off the bomb.

    -- January 2009: A white supremacist named Keith Luke embarks on a killing rampage in Brockton, Mass., raping and wounding a black woman and killing her sister, then killing a homeless man before being captured by police as he is en route to a Jewish community center.

    -- February 2009: A Marine named Kody Brittingham is arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate President Obama. Brittingham also collected white-supremacist material.

    -- April 2009: A white supremacist named Richard Poplawski opens fire on three Pittsburgh police officers who come to his house on a domestic-violence call and kills all three, because he believed President Obama intended to take away the guns of white citizens like himself. Poplawski is currently awaiting trial.

    -- April 2009: Another gunman in Okaloosa County, Florida, similarly fearful of Obama's purported gun-grabbing plans, kills two deputies when they come to arrest him in a domestic-violence matter, then is killed himself in a shootout with police.

    -- May 2009: A "sovereign citizen" named Scott Roeder walks into a church in Wichita, Kansas, and assassinates abortion provider Dr. George Tiller.

    -- June 2009: A Holocaust denier and right-wing tax protester named James Von Brunn opens fire at the Holocaust Museum, killing a security guard.

    -- February 2010: An angry tax protester named Joseph Ray Stack flies an airplane into the building housing IRS offices in Austin, Texas. (Media are reluctant to label this one "domestic terrorism" too.)

    -- March 2010: Seven militiamen from the Hutaree Militia in Michigan and Ohio are arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate local police officers with the intent of sparking a new civil war.

    -- March 2010: An anti-government extremist named John Patrick Bedell walks into the Pentagon and opens fire, wounding two officers before he is himself shot dead.

    -- May 2010: A "sovereign citizen" from Georgia is arrested in Tennessee and charged with plotting the violent takeover of a local county courthouse.

    -- May 2010: A still-unidentified white man walks into a Jacksonville, Fla., mosque and sets it afire, simultaneously setting off a pipe bomb.

    -- May 2010: Two "sovereign citizens" named Jerry and Joe Kane gun down two police officers who pull them over for a traffic violation, and then wound two more officers in a shootout in which both of them are eventually killed.

    -- July 2010: An agitated right-winger and convict named Byron Williams loads up on weapons and drives to the Bay Area intent on attacking the offices of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, but is intercepted by state patrolmen and engages them in a shootout and armed standoff in which two officers and Williams are wounded.

    -- September 2010: A Concord, N.C., man is arrested and charged with plotting to blow up a North Carolina abortion clinic. The man, 26-year--old Justin Carl Moose, referred to himself as the "Christian counterpart to (Osama) bin Laden” in a taped undercover meeting with a federal informant.


    http://crooksandliars.com/davi...-...

  15. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    Hmmm,
    "Death threats to Bay Area senator catch eye of Giffords investigators
    The investigation into the shooting of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona has led detectives to state Sen. Leland Yee, who also received death threats for criticizing Sarah Palin, but officials are not saying whether they have uncovered any link between the two.
    The chief of staff for Yee, a Democrat representing northern San Mateo County and western San Francisco, said he was briefly questioned by a Pima County, Ariz., sheriff's detective who called him Monday. The Tucson-area detectives are investigating the shooting that killed six people and injured Giffords, who is also a Democrat.
    (The Arizona detective) said, 'In our situation we're seeing very similar faxes and wanted to follow up on the status of your investigation,' "

    Well. This could get interesting. If there is anything to it.
    Same force that got Giffords is after Yee too? And is on the side of Sarah Palin. What a great detective story that would be....if you lived to tell it.

  16. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    Awwwwww, see what happens when you google????

    Sarah Palin blamed by the US Secret Service over death threats against Barack Obama
    Sarah Palin's attacks on Barack Obama's patriotism provoked a spike in death threats against the future president, Secret Service agents revealed during the final weeks of the campaign.

    By Tim Shipman in Washington 2:01PM GMT 08 Nov 2008
    "The Republican vice presidential candidate attracted criticism for accusing Mr Obama of "palling around with terrorists", citing his association with the sixties radical William Ayers.
    The attacks provoked a near lynch mob atmosphere at her rallies, with supporters yelling "terrorist" and "kill him" until the McCain campaign ordered her to tone down the rhetoric.
    But it has now emerged that her demagogic tone may have unintentionally encouraged white supremacists to go even further.
    The Secret Service warned the Obama family in mid October that they had seen a dramatic increase in the number of threats against the Democratic candidate, coinciding with Mrs Palin's attacks.
    Michelle Obama, the future First Lady, was so upset that she turned to her friend and campaign adviser Valerie Jarrett and said: "Why would they try to make people hate us?"

    You know what? Palins death threats?.......Karma.

  17. Ralph Deeds profile image70
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    Giffords spoke for the first time yesterday--

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-shee … qzB8Yia$9p

 
working