Congresswoman Gabby Giffords Shot in Head

[New Kilballyowen]

essentially this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/ ... /#40982787

Ah, Keith Olbermann. Gotta love him. My favorite parts were when he and the chap from the SPLC totally ignored the left-wing material the nutjob who perpetrated this heinous act also cited as his favorites. They were too busy trying to demonize their ideological opponents to worry about silly things like facts though. Which also explains the SPLC fellow's characterization of Joseph Stack as being on the radical right, despite the fact that in his manifesto, Stack ranted about the need for health-care reform and talked about the evils of corporations, capitalism, and organized religion, as well as espousing the benefits of communism. Yup, a regular tea-bagger he was.

People really need to stop trying to exploit this tragedy to take cheap shots at people with different political views from their own.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyh ... n-arizona/

[New Kilballyowen]

Obviously I was looking at the bigger picture and the various videos, statements, and other works that came from him which clearly showed someone who was violent and had violent thoughts and able to carry out such violence, as opposed to some guy who was just pissed off and blogged about DA EBIL GOVERNMENTS.

If an Arab American took a picture with a bomb on a textbook the FBI would have an entire fucking divison swarming his residence within the day, but when a seemingly harmless white boy does stuff like this for YEARS, everyone turns a cheek.

Until he blows someones brains.

Ahh, sweet smell of liberty.

How do you know the authorities were even aware of his videos before he did this? It's not like there's a shortage of insane and potentially violent crap on youtube, nor is uploading videos there restricted to Americans.

It's true. The government simply doesn't have the manpower or the funding to sift through YouTube videos looking for nutjobs like this guy. And even if they did try to do it, why should we expect them to succeed fabulously? I mean, has anyone here been through an airport security checkpoint lately? Or seen any of the countless news stories about TSA screeners failing miserably to catch things (including loaded guns) in the bags they are supposed to be screening?

No matter how many precautions are taken, some nutjobs will always manage to slip through the cracks and commit horrible acts like this one. It's sad, but it's true.

[Laerod]

only in the sense that he probably was technically ineligible, and therefore it was funny. nobody actually gave a shit. i mean, i was among the biggest pushers of the idea on NSG, and i think the entire concept of restricting the presidency to natural born citizens is a bit silly. and that was my sense of the general feeling everywhere it came up, too. a sort of "man, those guys are even more ridiculous than most people realize".

The main point behind Natural Born Citizenship was Jefferson and Cronies were trying to keep Hamilton from running for office which they accomplished.

What? How? Hamilton was just as eligible as Jefferson and neither was a natural born US citizen.

[New Kilballyowen]

The main point behind Natural Born Citizenship was Jefferson and Cronies were trying to keep Hamilton from running for office which they accomplished.

What? How? Hamilton was just as eligible as Jefferson and neither was a natural born US citizen.

It's true. Article Two, Section 1 of the Constitution (the natural born citizen part) did contain a grandfather provision, waiving the requirement for people who were citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. Hamilton fell into this category, as did George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and several other early presidents.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President

(emphasis added)

[Wikkiwallana]

Imagine a man in saffron robes with a shaved head. Now imagine him holding a heavy club and repeatedly hitting another man in saffron robes with a shaved head. That's a militant Buddhist.

...

Still having trouble.

Problem is, I think I'm thinking about the potential hilarity of my political candidates in the other thread.

Read Thief of Time or Night Watch by Terry Pratchett, you'll get a good picture and a good laugh.

[Rambhutan]

Maybe some kind of national health service would help identify people with mental health problems, so you could take their guns away from them.

[Gauthier]

Maybe some kind of national health service would help identify people with mental health problems, so you could take their guns away from them.

THAT'S SOCIALISM!!!

[Juristonia]

essentially this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/ ... /#40982787

Ah, Keith Olbermann. Gotta love him. My favorite parts were when he and the chap from the SPLC totally ignored the left-wing material the nutjob who perpetrated this heinous act also cited as his favorites.

I'm not entirely sure which Olbermann vid you were watching but he brought that up as well.

[Chrinthanium]

I couldn't believe this when I saw it on television? Madman takes potshot on Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), a member of Congress. Are things degrading so much in American society that we're resorting to trying to kill off Congress?

[Wilgrove]

I couldn't believe this when I saw it on television? Madman takes potshot on Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), a member of Congress. Are things degrading so much in American society that we're resorting to trying to kill off Congress?

Well believe it or not, he wasn't a Teabagger, I KNOW, right?! Apparently this guy's motive was less political, and more insane.

[Chrinthanium]

Insanity, plain and simple. There isn't any reason to resort to violence.

[Grave_n_idle]

Insanity, plain and simple. There isn't any reason to resort to violence.

Not sure it is 'plain and simple', at all. At least, it seems premature to leap quite that far to a conclusion.

Classmates 'remembering' him retrospectively as "obviously very disturbed", and a County Sheriff suggesting that the shooter was mentally unstable and possibly acting with an accomplice - should not be taken as proof of anything meaningful. It might be helpful if we knew why he wasn't accepted by the Army - but even that would be unlikely to reveal information that could realistically bring us to a conclusion of "insanity, plain and simple".

It's certainly hard to consider violent crime as 'sane', per se - but 'insanity' is a loaded concept in this context.

[Georgism]

Maybe some kind of national health service would help identify people with mental health problems, so you could take their guns away from them.

THAT'S SOCIALISM!!!

Plus taking their guns away is anti-American. What's to stop the government from just deciding all patriots and other people who hate big government from just deciding that we're mentally ill and taking our guns?

[The Bleeding Roses]

essentially this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/ ... /#40982787

Ah, Keith Olbermann. Gotta love him. My favorite parts were when he and the chap from the SPLC totally ignored the left-wing material the nutjob who perpetrated this heinous act also cited as his favorites. They were too busy trying to demonize their ideological opponents to worry about silly things like facts though. Which also explains the SPLC fellow's characterization of Joseph Stack as being on the radical right, despite the fact that in his manifesto, Stack ranted about the need for health-care reform and talked about the evils of corporations, capitalism, and organized religion, as well as espousing the benefits of communism. Yup, a regular tea-bagger he was.

People really need to stop trying to exploit this tragedy to take cheap shots at people with different political views from their own.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyh ... n-arizona/

The SPLC guy may be the ugliest man on the planet...

That being said, check his bio out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-potok
"Mark Potok leads one of the most highly regarded operations monitoring the extreme right in the world today. "

Needless to say, it's pretty apparent where his biases lie.

http://newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachlan ... iot-groups

Amazing piece on this guy's legitimacy.

[Innsmothe]

Ah, Keith Olbermann. Gotta love him. My favorite parts were when he and the chap from the SPLC totally ignored the left-wing material the nutjob who perpetrated this heinous act also cited as his favorites. They were too busy trying to demonize their ideological opponents to worry about silly things like facts though. Which also explains the SPLC fellow's characterization of Joseph Stack as being on the radical right, despite the fact that in his manifesto, Stack ranted about the need for health-care reform and talked about the evils of corporations, capitalism, and organized religion, as well as espousing the benefits of communism. Yup, a regular tea-bagger he was.

People really need to stop trying to exploit this tragedy to take cheap shots at people with different political views from their own.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyh ... n-arizona/

The SPLC guy may be the ugliest man on the planet...

That being said, check his bio out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-potok
"Mark Potok leads one of the most highly regarded operations monitoring the extreme right in the world today. "

Needless to say, it's pretty apparent where his biases lie.

http://newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachlan ... iot-groups

Amazing piece on this guy's legitimacy.

Says the guy posting a right wing blog to prove left wing bias.

[The Bleeding Roses]

The SPLC guy may be the ugliest man on the planet...

That being said, check his bio out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-potok
"Mark Potok leads one of the most highly regarded operations monitoring the extreme right in the world today. "

Needless to say, it's pretty apparent where his biases lie.

http://newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachlan ... iot-groups

Amazing piece on this guy's legitimacy.

Says the guy posting a right wing blog to prove left wing bias.

Did you read it champ?

Is taking the guy's own statements made in absence of the facts and comparing them to what was actually discovered after the fact somehow wrong?

[Georgism]

Did you read it champ?

Is taking the guy's own statements made in absence of the facts and comparing them to what was actually discovered after the fact somehow wrong?

Yes because you did it.

[Innsmothe]

Says the guy posting a right wing blog to prove left wing bias.

Did you read it champ?

Is taking the guy's own statements made in absence of the facts and comparing them to what was actually discovered after the fact somehow wrong?

It is a site dedicated to defaming anything it considers to be 'liberal news media'.

[Grave_n_idle]

Ah, Keith Olbermann. Gotta love him. My favorite parts were when he and the chap from the SPLC totally ignored the left-wing material the nutjob who perpetrated this heinous act also cited as his favorites. They were too busy trying to demonize their ideological opponents to worry about silly things like facts though. Which also explains the SPLC fellow's characterization of Joseph Stack as being on the radical right, despite the fact that in his manifesto, Stack ranted about the need for health-care reform and talked about the evils of corporations, capitalism, and organized religion, as well as espousing the benefits of communism. Yup, a regular tea-bagger he was.

People really need to stop trying to exploit this tragedy to take cheap shots at people with different political views from their own.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyh ... n-arizona/

The SPLC guy may be the ugliest man on the planet...

That being said, check his bio out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-potok
"Mark Potok leads one of the most highly regarded operations monitoring the extreme right in the world today. "

Needless to say, it's pretty apparent where his biases lie.

http://newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachlan ... iot-groups

Amazing piece on this guy's legitimacy.

Amazingly partisan piece of opinion 'journalism' from an openly far-right platform. That would be funny if you'd been talking about the alleged bias of the person being smeared in the article. Oh wait...

The fact that the SPLC might monitor 'the extreme right' doesn't actually constitute a disqualifying bias. If it is the militant right groups that are perceived as a problem, then it makes sense to monitor them.

I wonder if you'd be 'objecting' to alleged 'bias' if it said "extreme Islamic groups", instead of "extreme right" groups?

[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/

[New Kilballyowen]

Says the guy posting a right wing blog to prove left wing bias.

I never said that I was using it to prove anything. My proof was the omission of material in the Olbermann hit piece that didn't mesh with Olbermann's worldview, as well as the ludicrous pronouncement by the gentleman from the SPLC that the nutjob who crashed a plane into an IRS building was a right-winger. I merely linked the blog because I found it interesting.

I'm not trying to "prove" left-wing bias, as there is no need when talking about Keith Olbermann's show. It's not a "hard news" program. It's an opinion-driven show, hosted by an avowed liberal. I no more need to prove the left-wing bias of Olbermann and his guests than I do the right-wing bias of Sean Hannity and his.

[Innsmothe]

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/

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

You could have found the same thin on CNN.

[Grave_n_idle]

Says the guy posting a right wing blog to prove left wing bias.

Did you read it champ?

Is taking the guy's own statements made in absence of the facts and comparing them to what was actually discovered after the fact somehow wrong?

His 'statements', even in that source suggest that 'there is a possibility' that the suicide-presented-as-homicide might be motivated by anti-Federal-government sentiment... and that someone flying a plane into an IRS building might have "ideas... seem connected to at least some of the core ideas of the radical right".

In other words, some speculation, and some citation of historical facts. Ooh, time to wave our hands and speculate about the liberal media bogeyman.

[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/

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.

[Grave_n_idle]

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.