Archive

Arizona Congresswoman shot at Public Event

  • FatHobbit
    Belly35;637204 wrote:Oh! my God
    Ty please tell us that the Union paid you to say that........

    You can admit that you're going to vote for Obama now. I'm sure that speech swayed your opinion. :-D
  • fish82
    stlouiedipalma;637117 wrote:While I agree that it's all about the economy, I don't subscribe to your belief that we'll be in a world of shit in 2012. There are signs that the economy is growing. It may not be as fast as we'd like, but it is growing. I notice that all of the usual suspects on this website (myself included) are still able to afford internet service and the electricity to power our computers. Go to any major shopping center and tell me that Americans aren't buying. I was in New Orleans last week for the Sugar Bowl and it sure looked like folks were dropping some serious cash there. Beyond that, the companies which I consult for are in the process of hiring again, and they are traditionally among the last to recover from a recession. I think it will still be slow, but nowhere near your "world of shit" reference.

    And if people are working again in 2012, do you think they will want to change horses?
    I tend to agree. Things won't be pretty in 2012, but they'll be improved just enough to drag Bam across the finish line.
  • believer
    Ty Webb;637031 wrote:President Obama clinched his second term last night with that speech...
    Last summer you were telling us the Dems would hold on to Congress in a landslide.
  • Writerbuckeye
    BoatShoes;636792 wrote:What is so ridiculous? If you'd like to compare statements he's made throughout his public life between the divisive kind you cite and the more pleasant ones imagining that conservatives and liberals could find common ground be my guest. BHO is the anti-Bush and Reagan. President Reagan told us it was a time for choosing. President Bush told us we could either be with him or against him. BHO says "In a country as diverse as ours, there will always be passionate arguments about how we draw the line when it comes to government action. That is how our democracy works. But our democracy might work a bit better if we recognized that all of us possess values that are worthy of respect: if liberals at least acknowledged that the recreational hunter feels the same way about his gun as they feel about their library books, and if conservatives recognized that most women feel as protective of their right to reproductive freedom as evangelicals do of their right to worship."

    That is not what the average modern liberal or conservative believes. Bill Maher does not respect conservative worldviews. Rush Limbaugh doesn't respect liberal worldviews.

    Now look, I'm not saying one or the other approach is better but there is a clear difference in the way that BHO governs from conservative icons. RR and GWB were deontological in their approach and their goal was to persuade people toward their way. BHO has sacrificed core principles that he outlined on his campaign on nearly every domestic policy action that took place in the last two years...and he didn't have to because he could have gone to reconciliation before crunch time but he didn't. Liberals are unhappy with him because he didn't fight for their causes the way a RR or GWB would for conservativism.

    I know your bias against and dislike for the socialist you believe him to be is strong but just take a look at real genuine liberals out there one of these days. They don't have the same image of him that you have. Just read a Paul Krugman article, the liberal flame thrower...he's essentially given up on him and is awaiting President Palin.

    Bush was talking about the war on terror and potential enemies when he said that -- he wasn't discussing domestic policy. Good Lord.

    Let's not forget Obama's disdain for the average American, either. You know, the folks he says cling to their guns and Bibles. The man talks out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to respect. And I don't believe for one second he has given up any of his core principles.
  • dwccrew
    Prescott;637082 wrote:I truly believe that is the most absurd statement I have ever seen on this board.
    believer;637338 wrote:Last summer you were telling us the Dems would hold on to Congress in a landslide.

    Gentlemen, consider the source.
  • ptown_trojans_1
    Writerbuckeye;637354 wrote:Bush was talking about the war on terror and potential enemies when he said that -- he wasn't discussing domestic policy. Good Lord.

    Let's not forget Obama's disdain for the average American, either. You know, the folks he says cling to their guns and Bibles. The man talks out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to respect. And I don't believe for one second he has given up any of his core principles.

    I agree on the first part, but I don't think the President has a disdain for the average American, considering those are the ones (the middle) that elected him.
  • Writerbuckeye
    So you really think the average person who voted for Obama is religious and has guns?

    I sure don't.

    I think he was caught in an off-guard moment (he's had a few, like Joe the plumber) where he actually said something he truly believed. I think he has great disdain for people who are conservative, have great faith, and believe in a strong Second Amendment. I don't think for one second he sees these folks as any more than a means to an end -- and will say about anything to get elected. He is a liberal elite who believes he knows better than these folks what is best for them, and many of his speeches and legislative initiatives prove it.
  • ptown_trojans_1
    Writerbuckeye;637458 wrote:So you really think the average person who voted for Obama is religious and has guns?

    I sure don't.

    I think he was caught in an off-guard moment (he's had a few, like Joe the plumber) where he actually said something he truly believed. I think he has great disdain for people who are conservative, have great faith, and believe in a strong Second Amendment. I don't think for one second he sees these folks as any more than a means to an end -- and will say about anything to get elected. He is a liberal elite who believes he knows better than these folks what is best for them, and many of his speeches and legislative initiatives prove it.

    lol. The average American is religious to some degree and usually does not have or cling to guns. The average American did not care really for those comments really either.
  • BGFalcons82
    Has anyone heard about the threats of violence against a private citizen?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/13/palin-targeted-tweets-following-arizona-shooting-massacre/

    Hmmm....the media is reporting this with the same enthusiasm and dismay that they proclaimed the Arizona shooting deaths on right wingers? Why are these assinine nutcases given a pass to threaten a citizen? Could it be because....well...ummm...uhhh....the press AGREES with them? This is so fucking disgusting. You all that think she deserves this treatment are as whacked out as Loughner. Period.
  • tk421
    BGFalcons82;637563 wrote:Has anyone heard about the threats of violence against a private citizen?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/13/palin-targeted-tweets-following-arizona-shooting-massacre/

    Hmmm....the media is reporting this with the same enthusiasm and dismay that they proclaimed the Arizona shooting deaths on right wingers? Why are these assinine nutcases given a pass to threaten a citizen? Could it be because....well...ummm...uhhh....the press AGREES with them? This is so fucking disgusting. You all that think she deserves this treatment are as whacked out as Loughner. Period.

    Don't you know that the left motto is "Do As We Say, Not As We Do"? They can get away with anything they want, but a republican does it and it's OMG, She Caused It!.
  • ptown_trojans_1
    BGFalcons82;637563 wrote:Has anyone heard about the threats of violence against a private citizen?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/13/palin-targeted-tweets-following-arizona-shooting-massacre/

    Hmmm....the media is reporting this with the same enthusiasm and dismay that they proclaimed the Arizona shooting deaths on right wingers? Why are these assinine nutcases given a pass to threaten a citizen? Could it be because....well...ummm...uhhh....the press AGREES with them? This is so fucking disgusting. You all that think she deserves this treatment are as whacked out as Loughner. Period.

    Yeah, not a fan. Not smart at all really, doesn't help.
    I prefer the approach of just ignoring Palin really lol.
  • tk421
    Ah, yes. Looks like the good old Obama administration has taken his message of less rhetoric and violence to heart. Always count on Biden to act like an idiot. I don't watch the news, but has this been getting any play on the air? (I very much doubt it :rolleyes:)

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/122763-biden-if-i-hear-one-more-gop-budget-gripe-i-am-going-to-strangle-them
    “If I hear one more Republican tell me about balancing the budget, I am going to strangle them,” Biden said at a fundraiser in Minnesota, according to a pool report. “To the press, that’s a figure of speech.”
    Palin gets blasted for using a figure of speech about shooting someone, but the Vice President of the United States can joke about strangling Republicans. Go figure.
  • Writerbuckeye
    Biden has been given a free pass by the media on anything he says or does, no matter how outrageous or stupid. They protect him by simply ignoring him. If he were a Republican, there would be daily reports of his lunacy.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    Writerbuckeye;638609 wrote:Biden has been given a free pass by the media on anything he says or does, no matter how outrageous or stupid. They protect him by simply ignoring him. If he were a Republican, there would be daily reports of his lunacy.

    Like Dan Quayle?

    FWIW, I've met Quayle, and he seems to be a very genuine person, particularly for a politician. I do agree with the media at the time that he was a bit over his head as VEEP. He wasn't qualified for that position.

    But I agree with your general point. Biden is incompetent. In my lifetime there is no one that has held the Pres or VEEP office that seems to be so intellectually dull as Biden - or even close for that matter. How Smilin' Joe gets a pass is beyond me. It is almost a miracle when he says anything remotely smart. I disagree with many of Obama's policies, but for the past two years with Biden first in line and Pelosi second in line, I'd sign up for the Secret Service and take a bullet for BO.
  • I Wear Pants
  • bases_loaded
    So I go to watch Modern Family and The Defenders on my DVR last night...Fucking President is on my TV turning a memorial service into a political pep rally. When was the Ft. Hood memorial service and where were the t-shirts and football stadium speeches?
  • QuakerOats
    Shooter was a Bush hater ............ imagine that; I'm sure it will be the lead story on all the major networks tonight.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/us/16loughner.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=3&adxnnlx=1295272816-mzPTbiXmgfYK5d56DmiDjg

    The left-stream media has no shame.
  • ptown_trojans_1
    QuakerOats;641271 wrote:Shooter was a Bush hater ............ imagine that; I'm sure it will be the lead story on all the major networks tonight.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/us/16loughner.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=3&adxnnlx=1295272816-mzPTbiXmgfYK5d56DmiDjg

    The left-stream media has no shame.

    I love how you pulled that out. If it was the front headline or the start of the article, I'd agree with you. However, it was buried on page 3 of 7 of the article, and before that his crazy mental issues.

    From the start of the article:
    What the cacophony of facts do suggest is that Mr. Loughner is struggling with a profound mental illness (most likely paranoid schizophrenia, many psychiatrists say); that his recent years have been marked by stinging rejection — from his country’s military, his community college, his girlfriends and, perhaps, his father; that he, in turn, rejected American society, including its government, its currency, its language, even its math. Mr. Loughner once declared to his professor that the number 6 could be called 18.
    Nothing about hating Bush there. Come on, you are reaching just like the lefties did at the start.
  • Con_Alma
    Manhattan Buckeye;638635 wrote:Like Dan Quayle?

    FWIW, I've met Quayle, and he seems to be a very genuine person, particularly for a politician. I do agree with the media at the time that he was a bit over his head as VEEP. He wasn't qualified for that position.

    ...
    I have golfed with Dan multiple times. His parents are classic Midwestern folks and his wife is very intelligent. Dan may have been over his head at the time but for those media people to have labeled him as unintelligent was simply an indication of using anything they could to cast doubt on the administration at the time.
  • derek bomar
    ptown_trojans_1;637467 wrote:lol. The average American is religious to some degree and usually does not have or cling to guns. The average American did not care really for those comments really either.

    this
  • Writerbuckeye
    P-town...you can't judge the importance of information in today's journalism by WHERE that information is located in the article. If this were 20 years ago, maybe, but not now.

    Journalists today don't even tend to put all the traditional who, what, when, where and how in the lead paragraph or paragraphs. Often, that information gets pushed much deeper into a story because the author is trying to be creative (when they should just be factual) or because they have an agenda -- which we're seeing more of today, as well.

    I don't know where this particular fact lies within the context of this shooter at this point; only time may answer that question as more information comes out about just how paranoid this guy was and what he was most paranoid and angry about. My guess is if there's a trial, we'll find out that information from his interviews with psychiatrists.

    In general, though, I'd refrain from using placement as an indicator of reporting importance. Today's writers simply don't follow the traditional rules of journalism, anymore.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    "P-town...you can't judge the importance of information in today's journalism by WHERE that information is located in the article. If this were 20 years ago, maybe, but not now."

    I read the entire article, the NYT goes out of its way more than once to try to link this guy's behavior with that of a right-wing extremist. Why didn't they go out of their way to link his actions to those of a serial drug abuser?

    Journalism truly is dead.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    BTW I don't want to sound like I'm creating a toxic atmosphere by mentioning "dead" - it is figure of speech....which the old media used to hold sacrosanct.
  • jhay78
    QuakerOats;641271 wrote:Shooter was a Bush hater ............ imagine that; I'm sure it will be the lead story on all the major networks tonight.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/us/16loughner.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=3&adxnnlx=1295272816-mzPTbiXmgfYK5d56DmiDjg

    The left-stream media has no shame.
    ptown_trojans_1;641278 wrote:I love how you pulled that out. If it was the front headline or the start of the article, I'd agree with you. However, it was buried on page 3 of 7 of the article, and before that his crazy mental issues.

    From the start of the article:


    Nothing about hating Bush there. Come on, you are reaching just like the lefties did at the start.
    Writerbuckeye;641354 wrote:P-town...you can't judge the importance of information in today's journalism by WHERE that information is located in the article. If this were 20 years ago, maybe, but not now.

    Journalists today don't even tend to put all the traditional who, what, when, where and how in the lead paragraph or paragraphs. Often, that information gets pushed much deeper into a story because the author is trying to be creative (when they should just be factual) or because they have an agenda -- which we're seeing more of today, as well.

    I don't know where this particular fact lies within the context of this shooter at this point; only time may answer that question as more information comes out about just how paranoid this guy was and what he was most paranoid and angry about. My guess is if there's a trial, we'll find out that information from his interviews with psychiatrists.

    In general, though, I'd refrain from using placement as an indicator of reporting importance. Today's writers simply don't follow the traditional rules of journalism, anymore.

    To Writer's point, if you replaced the name "Bush" with the name "Obama" in that article, do you really think that info's on page 3, ptown?
  • QuakerOats
    ptown_trojans_1;641278 wrote:Nothing about hating Bush there. Come on, you are reaching just like the lefties did at the start.

    I have no need to "reach". I found an article that indicates he was a Bush hater (in addition to obviously being unstable etc), which seems to fly in the face of the radical media's attempts to initially pin him as some kind of republican sympathizer. The 'left' did all the reaching right out of the gate; most of the rest of us are just calling them on it.