Congresswoman Gabby Giffords Shot in Head

[Innsmothe]

Again you choose a news page that actively support right wing groups.

You could have found the same thin on CNN.

Or... if you have such a problem with Fox you can verify the damn information on your own and quit whining.

I am just pointing out your hypocrisy, my dear.

[DaWoad]

Again you choose a news page that actively support right wing groups.

You could have found the same thin on CNN.

Or... if you have such a problem with Fox you can verify the damn information on your own and quit whining.

or you could do your part of the debating yourself rather than trying to hand it off to your opponent, hope they won't find to much and then if/when they do leave the debate without a word.

[Greater Phenia]

Guess you guys are also overlooking the fact that your buddy Keith got suspended from MSNBC for... donating the maximum limit to Gabby.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11 ... campaigns/

Non-relevant. Haven't you learned a thing yet? When you are old and gray, you might find some solace in being able to say you were the last, best, most hard-core and die-hard troll, but really doesn't change the fact, or hide the anger your words really express.

I mean you criticize "your buddy" (condescension) Keith for the crime (ha) of being charitable to a woman who has now been the victim of a senseless act? How is that even an argument? How is that supposed to make sense? Who is supposed to persuade? How is what you say good? Good for you, or good for any of us? It isn't true. I think you know better. Think about it.

[The Bleeding Roses]

Or... if you have such a problem with Fox you can verify the damn information on your own and quit whining.

I am just pointing out your hypocrisy, my dear.

I suggest you take two steps back from the keyboard and try to come up with a coherent thought as you aren't making any sense whatsoever.

[The Bleeding Roses]

Guess you guys are also overlooking the fact that your buddy Keith got suspended from MSNBC for... donating the maximum limit to Gabby.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11 ... campaigns/

Where do you honestly think you're going with this? It kinda looks like you're actually trying to defend someone shooting a (Democrat) Congresswoman in the head. By some kind of weird 'blame the victim' psychology that strips legitimacy from anyone who questions the motivations of the criminal.

I hope I'm misreading you, or you're just reacting from some kind of ill-considered kneejerk response.

It has nothing to do with the victim, only Olbermann. He is not a commentator on this issue, he is a campaign booster using it to further an agenda.

[The Bleeding Roses]

Or... if you have such a problem with Fox you can verify the damn information on your own and quit whining.

or you could do your part of the debating yourself rather than trying to hand it off to your opponent, hope they won't find to much and then if/when they do leave the debate without a word.

Care for a tissue seeing as you wish to complain about your indefensible position?

[Wilgrove]

A small rant.

What happened to Congresswoman Giffords and to several other people at her rally was tragic. It was a tragic event that was carried out by an unstable person. A person that had a history of violence and threats of violence. So far it doesn't seem like he's affiliated with any group, and instead was just a lone nutcase with a gun.

However, this should be a wake up call, scratch that, this IS a wake up call. For far too long, we have used the imagery of violence in our political discourse. We've had people threaten to bring about a second amendment solution to a problem in government that they do not like. People, holding up signs saying that they didn't bring their guns, this time. Hel, some people DID bring their guns to the rallies. From the politicians to the followers, the threat and imagery of violence echos through the hall of politics.

I know it makes a good talking point, and it gets the base riled up. However, it's pretty much yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. Sooner or later, someone is going to get trampled. This hasn't been the first act of violence due to the “fire” call either. After Obama Healthcare bill was passed, several senators and congressperson received threats and their office vandalized. During the Ground Zero Mosque debate, several mosques were vandalized with pig's blood and parts of animals the Muslim faith deems “unclean”. A man crashed a Cessna into the IRS building early on in 2010.

Politicians and figureheads honestly can't think that even hinting at a “call to arms” wouldn't come back and bite them in the ass. While this man, this deeply disturbed man may have not killed out of political reasons, it is nevertheless a shocking reminder as to what happens when we are not responsible with our liberties and freedom.

So I call upon the figureheads and politicians to return to a state where we have discussions and exchanges of ideas, and debates that doesn't include the rallying to arms. Because as we stand, we have two choices. We can return to reasonable debate and discourse, or we can head down the road to self destruction. In the infamous words of Jigsaw, The Choice Is Yours.

[Innsmothe]

Where do you honestly think you're going with this? It kinda looks like you're actually trying to defend someone shooting a (Democrat) Congresswoman in the head. By some kind of weird 'blame the victim' psychology that strips legitimacy from anyone who questions the motivations of the criminal.

I hope I'm misreading you, or you're just reacting from some kind of ill-considered kneejerk response.

It has nothing to do with the victim, only Olbermann. He is not a commentator on this issue, he is a campaign booster using it to further an agenda.

The same for Glenn Beck and his rallying cries for the tea-party, yet fox hasn't fired him for that endorsement.

[The Bleeding Roses]

Guess you guys are also overlooking the fact that your buddy Keith got suspended from MSNBC for... donating the maximum limit to Gabby.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11 ... campaigns/

Non-relevant. Haven't you learned a thing yet? When you are old and gray, you might find some solace in being able to say you were the last, best, most hard-core and die-hard troll, but really doesn't change the fact, or hide the anger your words really express.

I mean you criticize "your buddy" (condescension) Keith for the crime (ha) of being charitable to a woman who has now been the victim of a senseless act? How is that even an argument? How is that supposed to make sense? Who is supposed to persuade? How is what you say good? Good for you, or good for any of us? It isn't true. I think you know better. Think about it.

Supporting a politician is to be construed as a charitable donation now?

[The Bleeding Roses]

It has nothing to do with the victim, only Olbermann. He is not a commentator on this issue, he is a campaign booster using it to further an agenda.

The same for Glenn Beck and his rallying cries for the tea-party, yet fox hasn't fired him for that endorsement.

I wasn't aware that the tea party was a tangible person.

[Wilgrove]

It has nothing to do with the victim, only Olbermann. He is not a commentator on this issue, he is a campaign booster using it to further an agenda.

The same for Glenn Beck and his rallying cries for the tea-party, yet fox hasn't fired him for that endorsement.

They're not going to fire him as long as he brings in loads of money from advertisers and sponsors.

[Innsmothe]

The same for Glenn Beck and his rallying cries for the tea-party, yet fox hasn't fired him for that endorsement.

I wasn't aware that the tea party was a tangible person.

It;s a political element, which Fox cannot publicly endorse if it wants to 'remain' 'fair and balanced'.

[Wilgrove]

The same for Glenn Beck and his rallying cries for the tea-party, yet fox hasn't fired him for that endorsement.

I wasn't aware that the tea party was a tangible person.

I wasn't aware that Keith was trying to paint himself as unbiased. You see, Keith at least has the honesty and intergy to say "Yes, I have a liberal biased". He also doesn't try to pass off his show as a News program, but rather admits that it's an opinion driven talk show.

I wish people on Faux News would start doing that.

[Greater Phenia]

Where do you honestly think you're going with this? It kinda looks like you're actually trying to defend someone shooting a (Democrat) Congresswoman in the head. By some kind of weird 'blame the victim' psychology that strips legitimacy from anyone who questions the motivations of the criminal.

I hope I'm misreading you, or you're just reacting from some kind of ill-considered kneejerk response.

It has nothing to do with the victim, only Olbermann. He is not a commentator on this issue, he is a campaign booster using it to further an agenda.

The Marxist agenda, right? The Obama socialist tyranny hive-mind leftist plot? Perhaps you will refer to Obama as "the left's Messiah," not knowing who you really sound like when you say that? I know this song, you've sung it a thousand times, and I still don't like the way it sounds. If you want to discuss what Olbermann said, by all means discuss what he said, but I can find nothing wrong with his earnestly meant and truthfully spoken words. I doubt you can either, hence the attacking-the-reading-between-the-lines angle.

Dead rhetoric, empty rhetoric, meaningless rhetoric. Your words, your agenda, is not doing any good here, now; not to you, not to anyone. Try a different song. Remember in GDODAD when I thought "chairman" meant "has a chair at the table?" Good times, man.

[Greater Phenia]

A small rant.

What happened to Congresswoman Giffords and to several other people at her rally was tragic. It was a tragic event that was carried out by an unstable person. A person that had a history of violence and threats of violence. So far it doesn't seem like he's affiliated with any group, and instead was just a lone nutcase with a gun.

However, this should be a wake up call, scratch that, this IS a wake up call. For far too long, we have used the imagery of violence in our political discourse. We've had people threaten to bring about a second amendment solution to a problem in government that they do not like. People, holding up signs saying that they didn't bring their guns, this time. Hel, some people DID bring their guns to the rallies. From the politicians to the followers, the threat and imagery of violence echos through the hall of politics.

I know it makes a good talking point, and it gets the base riled up. However, it's pretty much yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. Sooner or later, someone is going to get trampled. This hasn't been the first act of violence due to the “fire” call either. After Obama Healthcare bill was passed, several senators and congressperson received threats and their office vandalized. During the Ground Zero Mosque debate, several mosques were vandalized with pig's blood and parts of animals the Muslim faith deems “unclean”. A man crashed a Cessna into the IRS building early on in 2010.

Politicians and figureheads honestly can't think that even hinting at a “call to arms” wouldn't come back and bite them in the ass. While this man, this deeply disturbed man may have not killed out of political reasons, it is nevertheless a shocking reminder as to what happens when we are not responsible with our liberties and freedom.

So I call upon the figureheads and politicians to return to a state where we have discussions and exchanges of ideas, and debates that doesn't include the rallying to arms. Because as we stand, we have two choices. We can return to reasonable debate and discourse, or we can head down the road to self destruction. In the infamous words of Jigsaw, The Choice Is Yours.

^This. Ding ding ding, you win the internet!

[The Bleeding Roses]

I wasn't aware that the tea party was a tangible person.

It;s a political element, which Fox cannot publicly endorse if it wants to 'remain' 'fair and balanced'.

It is a social movement, much like the civil rights or woman's rights movement, not a partisan political element.

[The Bleeding Roses]

I wasn't aware that the tea party was a tangible person.

I wasn't aware that Keith was trying to paint himself as unbiased. You see, Keith at least has the honesty and intergy to say "Yes, I have a liberal biased". He also doesn't try to pass off his show as a News program, but rather admits that it's an opinion driven talk show.

I wish people on Faux News would start doing that.

I don't seem to recall a statement in that segment about his contribution.

[Innsmothe]

It;s a political element, which Fox cannot publicly endorse if it wants to 'remain' 'fair and balanced'.

It is a social movement, much like the civil rights or woman's rights movement, not a partisan political element.

Bull shit, it has since day one spat out poorly phrased and badly slanted political dogma.

The Whole get the Dems out of office thing with the gun-sights etc.

[Horsefish]

It;s a political element, which Fox cannot publicly endorse if it wants to 'remain' 'fair and balanced'.

It is a social movement, much like the civil rights or woman's rights movement, not a partisan political element.

Are you seriously equating the tea party to the civil rights movement?

[The Bleeding Roses]

It is a social movement, much like the civil rights or woman's rights movement, not a partisan political element.

Bull shit, it has since day one spat out poorly phrased and badly slanted political dogma.

The Whole get the Dems out of office thing with the gun-sights etc.

Last I checked the tea party has no organizational structure, but rather, it is simply a dense social network.

Also, you might want to recheck your sources. Incumbents in general were the candidates the movement had opposition with seeing as the movement pushed against republican incums in primary battles as well.

[The Bleeding Roses]

It is a social movement, much like the civil rights or woman's rights movement, not a partisan political element.

Are you seriously equating the tea party to the civil rights movement?

Yes, they are both social movements. You will find tenured university professors making the same claim at numerous universities across the country...

[Scientific socks]

I just find it hard to believe she is still alive. Isnt there a brain in her head?
Or am I mistaken?

[Horsefish]

Are you seriously equating the tea party to the civil rights movement?

Yes, they are both social movements. You will find tenured university professors making the same claim at numerous universities across the country...

Sorry, I jumped the gun on that one. I tohught you were drawing paralells between the two other than that.
Carry on.

[Forlon]

I wasn't aware that Keith was trying to paint himself as unbiased. You see, Keith at least has the honesty and intergy to say "Yes, I have a liberal biased". He also doesn't try to pass off his show as a News program, but rather admits that it's an opinion driven talk show.

I wish people on Faux News would start doing that.

I don't seem to recall a statement in that segment about his contribution.

He may not have said it in that segment, but god damn, does he have to say it every time? I suppose he does or people watching might think its a news show (which granted he does talk about hot topic stuff at the time, but then so does SNL and its not a news show) and that its not a show about what he feels is going on in the world, NO! it must be a news show if he's going to talk about the news.

Bottom line, most people that watch his show on a regular basis know that its his take on the news stories of the day and not just news in general. He puts his own spin on it.

And about the Tea Party, they are a political party obviously...they even put it in the name of the fucking thing! I also can't believe they decided to go with that, considering that originally the tea party refered to the Boston Tea Party which was about breaking away from England, unless I was horribly mistaught in school, and forming a new country...is that what the tea party wants is its own country?

Edit: Added extra thoughts, since Tea Party in and of itself does not necessarily denote a political party.

[Innsmothe]

Bull shit, it has since day one spat out poorly phrased and badly slanted political dogma.

The Whole get the Dems out of office thing with the gun-sights etc.

Last I checked the tea party has no organizational structure, but rather, it is simply a dense social network.

Also, you might want to recheck your sources. Incumbents in general were the candidates the movement had opposition with seeing as the movement pushed against republican incums in primary battles as well.

I still wouldn't be surprised if all the political mongrels contained in that shit storm of a 'social network' were all fucking Kluckers, seriously.