Originally Posted by Weave

Nice try all weekend trying to make this guy out as some type of right winger. Hardly. Here is one of his classmates decscribing him as far left. I doubt he knew what he was. His ideas seemed so jumbled, just another kook. As far as your comments about the right trying to "cover thier ass"
Its more like, we arent going to allow you guys to pin this on us like you did OK city. Thankfully we have the media outlests now to do that.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/val...ed_shooter.php

That women said that she was a RWer and many on the left think the Nazis were Leftists. Another classmate over on DU said that he is a vicious anti-Semite and racist and picked a fight with that poster 9who is Jewish).

Originally Posted by James50

And what is "if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"?

This is an absurd thread. We are not on the cusp of even random political violence. We have gone about as far as the American people and our Constitution will allow as far as gun control. Better mental health care is the best answer to this situation from what we have heard so far.

James50

I'm glad someone mentioned gun control, even though the media pundits, politicians and right-wingers (and some left-wingers too, and libertarians I hasten to add!) have effectively put the issue on the back burner with the nonsense that we need guns to protect ourselves.

It is just another in a long litany of issues we Americans refuse to face, preferring to remain in the cloud of delusion and denial. At least in 1993 the president had the guts to try and start to deal with this issue. But the Bush Supreme Court scuttled it.

There is no doubt that nuts like this guy would have had a harder time finding a gun if good gun control laws have been in effect. And so with so many other shootings. The list goes on and on. Americans turn a blind eye and can't see the obvious. Other societies don't have this problem, because they regulate guns. Our outdated 2nd Amendment protects the gun nuts and wackos and deceived Americans and the companies that profit from this business of death. When will we wake up? Probably not for a while. But at least the statement needs to be made.

Just across the border from Arizona, a war rages on with guns supplied by the United States, to feed a market in the United States. Again we turn a blind eye. There's no doubt that if we had gun laws like the Mexicans and almost everyone else has, the Mexicans wouldn't have to smuggle guns into Mexico to supply their drug war. And our own "war on drugs" has been a dismal failure, and is the reason for the deaths of good people like the mayor of Santiago, good reporters, innocent good people killed by these Mexican merchants of death supplied by our own.

A nation that has a record like ours, cannot be said to be a great nation by any stretch of the imagination. We have a lot of work to do, and a long road to travel.

At the moment, we have turned our noses back around and are going rapidly backward on this road again. Thank you, Tea Party and heartland voters for nothing.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I'm glad someone mentioned gun control, even though the media pundits, politicians and right-wingers (and some left-wingers too) have effectively put the issue on the back burner with the nonsense that we need guns to protect ourselves.

It is just another in a long litany of issues we Americans refuse to face, preferring to remain in the cloud of delusion and denial. At least in 1993 the president had the guts to try and start to deal with this issue. But the Bush Supreme Court scuttled it.

More like someone on the court actually read the Bill of Rights for a change. The framers of the Constitution understood that giving any one group of people a monopoly on force is a recipe for tyranny.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Just across the border from Arizona, a war rages on with guns supplied by the United States, to feed a market in the United States. Again we turn a blind eye. There's no doubt that if we had gun laws like the Mexicans and almost everyone else has, the Mexicans wouldn't have to smuggle guns into Mexico to supply their drug war. And our own "war on drugs" has been a dismal failure, and is the reason for the deaths of good people like the mayor of Santiago, good reporters, innocent good people killed by these Mexican merchants of death supplied by our own.

Suggesting that the War on Drugs is a failure is the first sensible thing you have said.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

A nation that has a record like ours, cannot be said to be a great nation by any stretch of the imagination. We have a lot of work to do, and a long road to travel.

At the moment, we have turned our noses back around and are going rapidly backward on this road again. Thank you, Tea Party and heartland voters for nothing.

Interesting how much contempt you show for people who will not accept your enlightened rule and then shut up and do as they are told. This view is at the core of the modern progressive/liberal mindset.

Originally Posted by jadams

But these anomalies keep murdering Democrats.

Except of course, he actually shot and killed Judge John Roll, a conservative judge appointed by George H. W. Bush. Well that's all the reasoning I need. Clearly that must mean that Jared Loughner's motivations stemmed from liberal ideology!

I have no evidence of this of course, but I do have an empty, cold, souless pit that I need to fill with politics.

Are all of you political apes done exploiting the dead yet, or should I expect some more shameful disrespect and political violation of the still warm corpses from some of you folks? And you all think Mr. Loughner is sick?

Originally Posted by Galen

More like someone on the court actually read the Bill of Rights for a change. The framers of the Constitution understood that giving any one group of people a monopoly on force is a recipe for tyranny.

The "group" you speak of is the legally, democratically-elected government charged with enforcing the law. Seems like the rest of the world's people don't share this concern, and that they have more respect for their governments. It seems like America is out of step. We have a macho need to have guns, or it may be some kind of masculine insecurity.

Interesting how much contempt you show for people who will not accept your enlightened rule and then shut up and do as they are told. This view is at the core of the modern progressive/liberal mindset.

Contempt? Shut up? I dunno. I'm just seeing and speaking the reality as it is. You don't see it that way. But good to see another point of view; I guess you are some sort of a libertarian. Of course, we don't have enough of those on the net

Originally Posted by Copperfield

And you all think Mr. Loughner is sick?

What other conclusion is justified? That is better than using the guy's supposed motives to validate left or right ideologies.

Originally Posted by Odin

I apologize for making unwarranted assumptions and jumping to the conclusion that Loughner was incited by Palin's gun-sight map.

Apology MORE than excepted Odin! Whew, glad to have you back.

It really is a "Spiral" of Violence, but IMO it takes "two to tango" and I see the rhetoric as coming from both Sides. Actually, I can't even keep track of all of the definitions that people are using to label themselves and the other Side.

PoC67

PS: Quick story. The first girl I ever started playing music with, recently contacted me that, after about 10 years, she was ready to start performing again. She and her husband now have 4 children. BTW, She's Black and he's White. She told me that her daughter was asked by a schoolmate whether she (her daughter) was Black or White. Her daughter responded: "I don't know"(said in a care-free little girl's voice) and continued playing. as did the schoolmate.

Being a Nomad-Xer, I simply love that World and it gives me hope that we may just be able to get through all this crap.

Q: "Are you RW or LW"? A: "I don't know"! F-ing Priceless!

Right-wing Libertarianism in america has always been nothing more than a code word for pro-totalitarianism. The sheer irony is shown when a so-called "libertarian" quotes marx, hitler and lenin and then shoots innocent people on behalf of fascist ideology. The rightwing is sad that the allies won WW2, and secretly believes that the only thing wrong about 9/11 was that more people were not killed. The right is in preparation for commiting treason against america.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

The "group" you speak of is the legally, democratically-elected government charged with enforcing the law. Seems like the rest of the world's people don't share this concern, and that they have more respect for their governments. It seems like America is out of step. We have a macho need to have guns, or it may be some kind of masculine insecurity.

I have learned from personal experience that the sort of people who infest governments are those who can be least trusted with any sort of power.

By some estimates there have been as many as 150 million people killed by governments, often their own, during wars or genocides in the twentieth century. You know, the sort of things that make people Stalin, Mao and Hitler infamous. I expect that many of those people thought the same thing: It can't happen here.

History has shown me that for thousands of years governments routinely turn on their own people.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Contempt? Shut up? I dunno. I'm just seeing and speaking the reality as it is. You don't see it that way. But good to see another point of view; I guess you are some sort of a libertarian. Of course, we don't have enough of those on the net

If this were the early twentieth century I would have been called a Liberal. If this were the first half of the 19th century I would have been called a Jeffersonian republican or maybe a Jacksonian Democrat. If this were the eighteenth century the label would almost certainly been Anti-Federalist. Pick one and you will probably be right.

One thing these groups all shared, no matter the label, was a dislike for tyranny, even a tyranny of the majority.

Originally Posted by Galen

I have learned from personal experience that the sort of people who infest governments are those who can be least trusted with any sort of power.

By some estimates there have been as many as 150 million people killed by governments, often their own, during wars or genocides in the twentieth century. You know, the sort of things that make people Stalin, Mao and Hitler infamous. I expect that many of those people thought the same thing: It can't happen here.

History has shown me that for thousands of years governments routinely turn on their own people.

If this were the early twentieth century I would have been called a Liberal. If this were the first half of the 19th century I would have been called a Jeffersonian republican or maybe a Jacksonian Democrat. If this were the eighteenth century the label would almost certainly been Anti-Federalist. Pick one and you will probably be right.

One thing these groups all shared, no matter the label, was a dislike for tyranny, even a tyranny of the majority.

I especially like the fact that you stated "maybe" i/r/t Jacksonian Democracy. While the dislike of the tyrannical possibilities of a Centralized Govt may have been apropriately attributed at the time to the followers of Jackson, with the benefit of hindsight, I would say Jacksonian Democracy WAS authoritarianly aggressive, if not outright tyrannical. I believe Davy Crockett believed it so; I highly suspect then non-citizen Cherokee Indians(et al) would agree as well.

I'll take a "well-administered" US Constitution over a specific "Side" any day.

PoC67

PS: Great Post IMO.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40981503...ith_olbermann/

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I'm glad someone mentioned gun control, even though the media pundits, politicians and right-wingers (and some left-wingers too, and libertarians I hasten to add!) have effectively put the issue on the back burner with the nonsense that we need guns to protect ourselves.

It is just another in a long litany of issues we Americans refuse to face, preferring to remain in the cloud of delusion and denial. At least in 1993 the president had the guts to try and start to deal with this issue. But the Bush Supreme Court scuttled it.

There is no doubt that nuts like this guy would have had a harder time finding a gun if good gun control laws have been in effect. And so with so many other shootings. The list goes on and on. Americans turn a blind eye and can't see the obvious. Other societies don't have this problem, because they regulate guns. Our outdated 2nd Amendment protects the gun nuts and wackos and deceived Americans and the companies that profit from this business of death. When will we wake up? Probably not for a while. But at least the statement needs to be made.

Just across the border from Arizona, a war rages on with guns supplied by the United States, to feed a market in the United States. Again we turn a blind eye. There's no doubt that if we had gun laws like the Mexicans and almost everyone else has, the Mexicans wouldn't have to smuggle guns into Mexico to supply their drug war. And our own "war on drugs" has been a dismal failure, and is the reason for the deaths of good people like the mayor of Santiago, good reporters, innocent good people killed by these Mexican merchants of death supplied by our own.

A nation that has a record like ours, cannot be said to be a great nation by any stretch of the imagination. We have a lot of work to do, and a long road to travel.

At the moment, we have turned our noses back around and are going rapidly backward on this road again. Thank you, Tea Party and heartland voters for nothing.

Eric, you do know that gun control has racist origins, right? The Governor Reagan was scared of the Black Panthers.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

The "group" you speak of is the legally, democratically-elected government charged with enforcing the law. Seems like the rest of the world's people don't share this concern, and that they have more respect for their governments. It seems like America is out of step. We have a macho need to have guns, or it may be some kind of masculine insecurity.

Contempt? Shut up? I dunno. I'm just seeing and speaking the reality as it is. You don't see it that way. But good to see another point of view; I guess you are some sort of a libertarian. Of course, we don't have enough of those on the net

Wow, I find your subtle authoritarianism in this post quite shocking, Eric. There are certain things no government has a right to touch, even a democratic government. Tyranny by Majority is still Tyranny.

The Washington Post notes that Temporarily, at least, voices are lowered in Washington For discussion purposes.

This was supposed to be the week of another "showdown" in Congress. Now, the very word makes politicians squeamish.

The shootings in Arizona resounded in Washington with a deep and immediate impact on the political conversation. As is the case with such shocking collective national moments, the attacks prompted a dramatic - if temporary - stand-down in the partisan battles that have consumed the capital.

While the Post isn't claiming a link between the extreme rhetoric that has become common recently and the recent shooting, there has been at least a token pause. We'll have to see how long it lasts.

Originally Posted by Odin

Eric, you do know that gun control has racist origins, right? The Governor Reagan was scared of the Black Panthers.

And that is just a recent wave. In the post Civil War south, a lot of people didn't want the newly freed slaves exercising the privileges and immunities that were supposed to come from the 14th Amendment. A lot of stuff came out of this. Posse Comitatus, the notion that the military could not enforce the law, was a reaction to Yankee troops occupying the south. There were a series of arguments nullifying various rights, such as the Second Amendment protecting militias rather than being an individual right. There was also a broad sweeping theory that the Bill of Rights did not grant individual rights, but only limited the powers of the federal Congress. The feds thus could not protect the Rights of the People. This was supposedly the responsibility of the states only, and thus minorities had no rights in the South.

These Jim Crow laws and interpretations were slowly whittled away during the 20th Century by people like Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King, but the Second Amendment was one of the last aspects of the Jim Crow interpretations to fall.

It is not clear to me that the Second Amendment is correct for modern times, but I am dismayed by how few people know how Jim Crow for a good part of the nation's history trumped the Bill of Rights.

Originally Posted by Skabungus

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40981503...ith_olbermann/

Great quote, we need more real leaders

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

Right-wing Libertarianism in america has always been nothing more than a code word for pro-totalitarianism. The sheer irony is shown when a so-called "libertarian" quotes marx, hitler and lenin and then shoots innocent people on behalf of fascist ideology. The rightwing is sad that the allies won WW2, and secretly believes that the only thing wrong about 9/11 was that more people were not killed. The right is in preparation for commiting treason against america.

Sounds seriously cynical to me. We need more rational, considerd dialog.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

The Washington Post notes that Temporarily, at least, voices are lowered in Washington For discussion purposes.



While the Post isn't claiming a link between the extreme rhetoric that has become common recently and the recent shooting, there has been at least a token pause. We'll have to see how long it lasts.

We need a long timeout, without inflammed rhetoric:

Jared Lee Loughner kept bizarre shrine in backyard - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47355.html
"Accused Tucson shooter Jared Lee Loughner kept a bizarre shrine featuring a creepy replica of a human skull behind his home, according to a report Monday that raised questions about the occult.
In a front page story, The New York Daily News reports that Loughner, who is charged with targeting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), had a camouflage tent set up in the backyard of the home he shares with his parents.

Inside the tent sits a replica white skull placed atop a pot filled with dried up oranges. To the right of the skull, are three white tall cylinder candles, photos published by the paper show. To the left, a bag of potting soil."..

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz1AdtuF5cC

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

And that is just a recent wave. In the post Civil War south, a lot of people didn't want the newly freed slaves exercising the privileges and immunities that were supposed to come from the 14th Amendment. A lot of stuff came out of this. Posse Comitatus, the notion that the military could not enforce the law, was a reaction to Yankee troops occupying the south. There were a series of arguments nullifying various rights, such as the Second Amendment protecting militias rather than being an individual right. There was also a broad sweeping theory that the Bill of Rights did not grant individual rights, but only limited the powers of the federal Congress. The feds thus could not protect the Rights of the People. This was supposedly the responsibility of the states only, and thus minorities had no rights in the South.

These Jim Crow laws and interpretations were slowly whittled away during the 20th Century by people like Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King, but the Second Amendment was one of the last aspects of the Jim Crow interpretations to fall.

It is not clear to me that the Second Amendment is correct for modern times, but I am dismayed by how few people know how Jim Crow for a good part of the nation's history trumped the Bill of Rights.

Condoleeza Rice tells a sobering story about when she was a young girl in Birmingham. There were high racial tensions and threats of violence. The police could not be trusted to protect them. She remembers her dad and other men from her neighborhood standing guard at the head of the street where she lived. They all had guns. She told this story when asked what she thought of the 2nd amendment.

James50

Originally Posted by Odin

That women said that she was a RWer and many on the left think the Nazis were Leftists. Another classmate over on DU said that he is a vicious anti-Semite and racist and picked a fight with that poster 9who is Jewish).

Anti Semitism has NOTHING to do with being conservative. Plenty of lefties out there are anti-semitic. Helen Thomas comes to mind. And yes, Nazism was an extension of left wing big government movements alive in Germany at the time.

No matter why Jared Lee Loughner went on this insane killing spree, it has surfaced the problem of violent language and weapon images used by way too many of our politicians. Think about this, if our children used some of these violent images and words at school, they would be suspended, or worse.

Originally Posted by Copperfield

I have no evidence of this of course, but I do have an empty, cold, souless pit that I need to fill with politics.

Quote of the month. Likely to be useful going forward, too.

Originally Posted by Skabungus

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40981503...ith_olbermann/

Ah yes. "violence, or threat of violence has no place in our democracy".

Which explains, by the way, the utter lack of anything resembling influence that the people have over their rulers. It is apparently Right and Good to complain (quietly and privately, and only in permitted means and along permitted channels, of course) and to beg. But to threaten the actual interests of those who rule?

Why that's just un-American.

Let's give a moment of thanks to the tools of the ruling class for reminding us subjects of our place.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Ah yes. "violence, or threat of violence has no place in our democracy".....

......Let's give a moment of thanks to the tools of the ruling class for reminding us subjects of our place.

They have become sadly comical if not irrelevant. There are just too many Political Chips to be won by DC/MSM to not try and gain Positioning.

PoC67

PS: I give both Sides a week; Two tops.

Almost forgot:

Originally Posted by Copperfield

I have no evidence of this of course, but I do have an empty, cold, souless pit that I need to fill with politics.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Quote of the month. Likely to be useful going forward, too.

Agree 100%!

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Ah yes. "violence, or threat of violence has no place in our democracy".

Which explains, by the way, the utter lack of anything resembling influence that the people have over their rulers. It is apparently Right and Good to complain (quietly and privately, and only in permitted means and along permitted channels, of course) and to beg. But to threaten the actual interests of those who rule?

Why that's just un-American.

Let's give a moment of thanks to the tools of the ruling class for reminding us subjects of our place.

I think a lot of people are beginning to see this, too. I get the sense we're not far from some kind of tipping point, where we either reign government back in, or we go the other direction and let them turn us all into serfs who allow them to continue their tyranny.

Will there be a Patrick Henry moment that galvanizes Americans? Will it be called treasonous (Henry was)? Or will we simply surrender, because we're told that it means "progress" for this nation?

Personally, I don't want to live like the Chinese do. I've seen too much of that. That's not progress at all, trust me.