dagblog - Comments for "November 22 (a repeat)"

Let's not get too

Barth — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 19:27:00 +0000

In reply to I am curious no word about

Let's not get too conspiratorial, ok? It is somehwat difficult to determine a motive when the shooter does not want to discuss it, preferring to speak to an attorney instead. The evidence outside of that, e.g., http://motherjones.com/transition/inter.php?dest=http://motherjones.com/..., is somewhat equivocal. That we are dealing with someone with issues of mental instability or worse, seems llikely. As Sheriff Dupnik has discussed, though, that the shooter might be crazy does not absolve those whose incendiary rhetoric makes "second amendment remedies" sound like it is okay. Since we decided to "de-institutionalize" the mentally challeneged (it is cheaper to do that, in theory and, of course, lower taxes is more important than anything else these days) are out there, and they listen to things that the rest of us may not hear the same way.

My post was meant to make this point, now more relevant than ever. It is that talk like this, often leads to things such as what happened Saturday. At the same time, we can control our own vitriol, too.

For instance, nobody can seriously contend that Gov Palin was advocating that Congresswoman Giffords or anyone else should be murdered. Her staff's obliviousness to what message they conveyed is far more serious, however, as is the blithe dismissal of all of this as having no bearing on whether a mentally challenged person might be encouraged to do something beyond ranting.

I also do not think Sharron Angle was intending to incite violence by here reference to "Second Amendment remedies." She is a simpleton, with an inadequate ability to express herself, who said something without knowing what she meant.

That either one of these people could be put forward as a serious political candidate, Gov Palin to be Vice President of the United States for crying out loud, says more than anything how low our political system has sunk.

There are people who post on Daily Kos, though, who called Secretary Clinton horrible names, and described her as a "war criminal" when she ran for president. I said then and repeat now that this is scurrilous, excessive and scary talk, but none of it amounts to what we have seen from the other side.

When a major figure on television refers to a doctor who performs legal abortions as "Tiller the killer" and Dr. Tiller is murdered, it is asinine to chalk that up exclusively or even primarily to the mental illness of the shooter.

When people are "praying" for the death of the President of the United States, and are not roundly condemned by those who generally oppose that president's policies, we have crossed a line that can not be ignored by pointing to the mental instability of someone who does what happened on Saturday. Yes, it was wrong for people to cheer when someone threw a shoe at President Bush, but these are not offsetting penalties.

If there are people from this community that have made threats against politicians who disagree with them, they should be outed and condemned. I would like to hear about them, though.

I am curious no word about

Beetlejuice — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 05:43:47 +0000

In reply to November 22 (a repeat)

I am curious no word about the motives for the shooting has yet emerged...more importantly, the political background that drove the action. The silence adds to speculation which is slowly working itself up. On one hand, many people including myself, look at the past political rhetoric and assign guilt by association...his actions mirror the rhetoric. On the other hand, the right are lawyering up, so to speak, by claiming the shooter a deranged liberal...as if only liberals would pack a weapon at a political event. And the past political rhetoric has no bearing...note Palin claiming her use of crosshairs were surveyor map points, not a rifle crosshairs. When they start to inform the public as to the motives behind the shooters rationale it will come in direct conflict with preconceived opinions that have had the time to hardened like concrete.

My question is relevant simply because the unanswered questions leads to the hardened misunderstanding between the Democrats and Republicnas. The more time a problem is allowed to fester, the more each side will justify their understanding using whatever info, past or present, that is available and can be modified to fit the puzzle their are making of the event. And when the truth emerges and it doesn't fit the matrix the public has erected there will be hostile reactions to both the authority that issues the info as well as to the political opposition as if they had their hands in on the decision process. It's the silence that is the accelerant of hostility that rules the political landscape nowadays. We see it with Democrats failing to go toe-to-toe with Republicans which makes their base angry and leads to hostile reactions, like refusing to vote as a form of protest.

It was, I am sure to her,

Barth — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 20:45:11 +0000

In reply to COMBUSTION. First time I saw

It was, I am sure to her, too, Rachel's finest moment. Gregory was trying to suck his thumb while all this was going on, but could not find it,

COMBUSTION. First time I saw

Richard Day — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 20:01:24 +0000

In reply to November 22 (a repeat)

COMBUSTION. First time I saw that Email. And good Meet the Press transcript.

Dick Armey straight out lying and Rachel catches him!

I just reviewed statistics on gun deaths in this country.

This latest tragedy is not some isolated incident at all. Soon our national politicians will all be traveling in Popemobiles and appearing at rallies on computer screens.

The right will not stop. They make too much money upping the ante on combustion.