Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords Shot at Arizona Event

[Spock]

john dough wrote:
Seeing.the.unseeable: what the hell is wrong with you?

Nothing. His initial post was dead on the money..

[Black]

Dakota wrote:
It is sick. Advise is pouring in how Obama should use this tragedy to resurrect his presidency a la Clinton and Bush. Clinton (or his advisers) did bemoan that he was cheated out of presiding over 9/11.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/08...06285.html

And it will be expected that the white house issue a statement.
And regardless of how that statement is worded, with soul-numbing predictability, people like you will try to twist it to look like he's using the tragedy to political ends.

[davester]

Perhaps this was not the particular item that incited the gunman, but I don't think that gives Sarah Palin a pass in any way at all. Given the fact that there are wackos out there who will follow people who incite or suggest violence, Palin's poster was asinine and irresponsible. We don't know yet, but it very well could have been the straw that broke the camel's back and sent this wacko out with a gun.


Note that Giffords' political opponent Jesse Kelly (endorsed by Palin) used this incredibly incendiary and irresponsible ad to rile up the folks in Giffords' district. Frankly, I'd be surprised if the gunman didn't cue in to either Palin's or Kelly's messages given the level of coincidence.

[Black]

Spock wrote:
[quote=john dough]
Seeing.the.unseeable: what the hell is wrong with you?

Nothing. His initial post was dead on the money..
Sorry, Spock, you had to be there. The casings had barely hit the ground and the scope of the tragedy was unknown when it was posted.

So . . . to the points raised-- what response should there have been, or should there be now to the "target" verbiage that the shooter seems to have heeded?
Is this about hate speech? Is this about gun control?

[Black]

davester wrote:
Perhaps this was not the particular item that incited the gunman, but I don't think that gives Sarah Palin a pass in any way at all. Given the fact that there are wackos out there who will follow people who incite or suggest violence, Palin's poster was asinine and irresponsible. We don't know yet, but it very well could have been the straw that broke the camel's back and sent this wacko out with a gun.


Note that Giffords' political opponent Jesse Kelly (endorsed by Palin) used this incredibly incendiary and irresponsible ad to rile up the folks in Giffords' district. Frankly, I'd be surprised if the gunman didn't cue in to either Palin's or Kelly's messages given the level of coincidence.

So should Kelly be held responsible? Tried?
I think it's crystal-clear that the shooter acted upon these ads as if it was a directive; what do we do with that information?

The guy is at the age where it's still likely to have your first schizophrenic break. Which may explain why he was (still) functional enough to create and manage those Youtube videos.

[davester]

Black wrote: So should Kelly be held responsible? Tried?
I think it's crystal-clear that the shooter acted upon these ads as if it was a directive; what do we do with that information?

The guy is at the age where it's still likely to have your first schizophrenic break. Which may explain why he was (still) functional enough to create and manage those Youtube videos.

Kelly and Palin have their right to freedom of speech. However I think what needs to happen is that americans need wake up and reject as unsuitable for public office (or leadership roles of any kind) for the people within our society who stoop to such tactics (i.e. inciting the nutcases to terrorism).

[Uncle Wig]

Black wrote:
[quote=Spock]
[quote=john dough]
Seeing.the.unseeable: what the hell is wrong with you?

Nothing. His initial post was dead on the money..
Sorry, Spock, you had to be there. The casings had barely hit the ground and the scope of the tragedy was unknown when it was posted.

So . . . to the points raised-- what response should there have been, or should there be now to the "target" verbiage that the shooter seems to have heeded?
Is this about hate speech? Is this about gun control?
Sorry Black, you are wrong. I was there (that is, in this thread - and in the town where this tragedy occurred). What seeing.the.unseeable posted WAS right on the money.

You really just need to STFU.

[Seacrest]

davester wrote:
Kelly and Palin have their right to freedom of speech. However I think what needs to happen is that americans need wake up and reject as unsuitable for public office (or leadership roles of any kind)

FWIW, both of them were rejected; they lost their respective elections.

[Carnos Jax]

Unfortunately Dakota is the one that needs to follow that advice.

[Spock]

Would that Tea Party favorite, Sharon Angle, call this a "Second Amendment Remedy?"