AZ Congresswomen Shot, betcha a Lib did it!

[Kramer]

You have nothing, Kramer.
You know nothing.

This guy was insane. All assassins are insane. Not one assassin has accomplished any goal other than perhaps his own death wish in the US since Booth shot Lincoln.

The worst thing that we can do is to allow insane people to buy dangerous guns.
 Since there are too many guns to control, and since we do not lock up people like Loughner up, and make it easy for them to buy guns, this will continue.

No, I have what I have and you have nothing. In the end when it turns out I am right and you are wrong you won't admit it. You are a Liberal through and through and it's not in your DNA to admit wrong. You are happy reading the Liberal press and their cover-up of facts. You are happy reading Liberal press and their lies about Conservatives. You enable people like the SHOOTER. You might as well have been the shooter!

[BT]

Where did i say that the right was saying left was the facilitator of the shooter? Where did i claim the finger pointing was equal in scale or manner and method?

asked and answered, yet again.  It is not surprising that both sides out of the gate were wanting to point their fingers at the others.

Minus your inability to back up your own claim, as well as the bogus charge that I said you USED the term copious, you could have saved yourself some embarrassment and a little credibility, by merely clarifying yourself a tad better

But to answer your question, Kramer seems to think the shooters politics had something to do with this.

Yea....and?  It was specific to the shooter himself, and in no way laying some claim that "the left side" was behind the shooter, analogous to how the left is trying to portray, i.e. pointing fingers at the right side as somehow having pushed this fella over the edge, as you were apparently inaccurately claiming about the "right side"

Again this is what I said:

I don't think it is the fault of conservatives, nor do i think it is the fault of liberals.

I think it is Loughners fault.

It is not surprising that both sides out of the gate were wanting to point their fingers at the others.

Pay particular attention to the last sentence. Pay particular attention to the first sentence.

Now pay attention to the middle sentence.

Now tell me where you get quantitative finger pointing (copious)

Now tell me where you get qualitative finger pointing (facilitating the shooting)

or any of the other numerous misrepresentations that you felt necessary to read into three simple sentences.

Did Kramer link liberal politics with the shooter. Yes he did.
Was the political thinking causative or symptomatic of an underlying illness , we don't find out until the 5th page of this thread. Finger pointing from the right to the left occurred.

CU4 posted the American Thinker article blaming Kos for the shooting.  Finger pointing from the right to the left occurred.

And we know that the left thinks Palin did it through the subliminal messaging from a campaign flyer.

Finger pointing from the left to the right occurred.

[Plane]

"At a time like this, it is terrible that we do have to think about politics. No matter what the shooter's motivations were, the left is going to blame this on the Tea Party movement. While we need to take a moment to extend our sympathies to the families of those who died, we cannot allow the hard left to do what it tried to do in 1995 after the Oklahoma City Bombing. Within the entire political spectrum, there are extremists, both on the left and the right. Violence of this nature should be decried by everyone, and not used for political gain," Phillips said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/09/pima-county-sheriff-sets-debate-price-free-speech/


There probly isn't a political solution to the problem posd by the idiots and insane who will be dangerous because they crave attention. John Lennon was shot because he was so well known that he became well known to his assassin, are we going to have no one famous at all?

I can't think of a flawless solution, at some point you have to do the best that can be done and accept the diffrence from perfection as necessacery.

The Tea party rallies were as good examples of decorm as any political rallys in recent years could expect. There is little organisation in the TEA party , I think it just appeals most to the  sort of people who pick up after themselves. If this loon had more exposure to the tea party would it have made him worse , or maybe better?

Odds are that no sort of political retoric would have been theraputic to him .

[BT]

Not really BT.....I actually think it would not be a mistake or an admission of anything
except good taste if Governor Palin took down something for a few days. For example
if someone had a banner up in town the week of a game against a team with a name
like Indians....and the banner said "Destroy The Indians" and the same week there
was a mass killing or plane crash involving Indians then it would be in poor taste to
leave it up....dont ya think? Sure the Left is going to race to somehow wrongly associate
this whackjob that loved Karl Marx Manifesto with Republicans....sure the Left will race
to see if this tragedy can help them take away gun rights which they had put on a
backburner because as is typical the American People dont agree with the leftists.

Actually I don't think it would be in poor taste to leave it up. Because by doing so we allow critics to redefine the intentions and meaning of the newly offending banner. Prior to the tragedy all but the most dishonest critics would have to agree that contextually the meaning of the sign meant that you wished the team named the Indians should be soundly defeated in the upcoming sporting event. Not that you wished all Native Americans to be summarily lined up and shot by a firing squad. And why would the meaning of that banner change because of a non sporting event related occurrence? If the beef is with the name of the team, critics should focus on that instead of using the death of others to further their own agenda.

Critics don't get to define your words. You do. And you certainly don't have to waste time defending your words just because some critic is too dense to understand contextually their meaning or so devoid of honesty that they will misrepresent your words just to shift the debate.

[Christians4LessGvt]

i hear ya....but i think i would take something down just out of respect
in a situation like that.....i can see both sides of the coin on this one.

some said if Def Leppard's album Pyromania would have come out
right after Sept 11 it would have had to have had a different album cover.

[sirs]

Where did i say that the right was saying left was the facilitator of the shooter? Where did i claim the finger pointing was equal in scale or manner and method?

asked and answered, yet again.  It is not surprising that both sides out of the gate were wanting to point their fingers at the others.

Minus your inability to back up your own claim, as well as the bogus charge that I said you USED the term copious, you could have saved yourself some embarrassment and a little credibility, by merely clarifying yourself a tad better

But to answer your question, Kramer seems to think the shooters politics had something to do with this.

Yea....and?  It was specific to the shooter himself, and in no way laying some claim that "the left side" was behind the shooter, analogous to how the left is trying to portray, i.e. pointing fingers at the right side as somehow having pushed this fella over the edge, as you were apparently inaccurately claiming about the "right side"

Again this is what I said:

I don't think it is the fault of conservatives, nor do i think it is the fault of liberals.

I think it is Loughners fault.

It is not surprising that both sides out of the gate were wanting to point their fingers at the others.

Pay particular attention to the last sentence. 

Good gravy Bt, that's PRECISELY what we've been paying particular attention.  And to this date, unless I've missed it in a subsequent post, as I've only just now logged on, we have yet to see any of these examples of the "right side" pointing at the "left side" as the cause/facilitator, analogous to what the MSM and left side are CURRENTLY doing by pointing fingers at the "right side".  Any "finger pointing from the right has been consistently on this 22year old.  Yea, it includes his probable politics and "motivations", but they are again specific to the person that actually perpetrated the crime.  Not some mass "right side" pointing at the "left side"

In other words, you got half the accusation to your last sentence, after paying particular attention to it, correct.  I'm left to assume your effort here is to placate a sense that it's no one's fault, but the shooter himself.  And in that, you'd be correct.  It's trying to claim that "right out of the gate", that "the right side" was trying to make some nebulous pointing of fingers at "the left side" for creating this monster.  He created himself, and to date, you haven't presented any examples contrary to that for the "right side" for your "both sides...." claim

Unless I've missed it of course.  Feel free to post it specifically, in context, if you have.  Simply pointing at the thread and infer that its just obvious, isn't going to cut it, I'm afraid

[BT]

My three sentences are self explanatory.

I gave examples for the third.

That should suffice.

What you read into those three sentences is up to you.

My intent and meaning remain intact.

[sirs]

and apparently 50% inaccurate, to boot.  Especially the last sentence that we've all been able to "pay particular attention" to

[BT]

and apparently 50% inaccurate, to boot.  Especially the last sentence that we've all been able to "pay particular attention" to

So the left isn't pointing fingers at the right?

Because both Kramer and CU pointed fingers at the left.

You do realize that your acceptance of my position has nothing to do with the accuracy of my statement.

Not some mass "right side" pointing at the "left side"

mass? where did i claim that? and if i didn't claim it, why are you expecting me to provide evidence of it?

 

[Christians4LessGvt]

BT....you did see this sentence in the article I posted in my first post right?

"By the left's own idiotic definition, Kos helped create a climate of
violence that directly led to the shootings in AZ yesterday"

the keys words being "idiotic definition"

[BT]

BT....you did see this sentence in the article I posted in my first post right?

"By the left's own idiotic definition, Kos helped create a climate of
violence that directly led to the shootings in AZ yesterday"

the keys words being "idiotic definition"

Yes I did.  Is American Thinker a left wing blog?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/the_left_not_the_right_owns_po.html

[sirs]

and apparently 50% inaccurate, to boot.  Especially the last sentence that we've all been able to "pay particular attention" to

So the left isn't pointing fingers at the right?  Because both Kramer and CU pointed fingers at the left.

At the apparently leftist shooter....yea.  Though it does appear that C is making references to "the left" now

You do realize that your acceptance of my position has nothing to do with the accuracy of my statement.

Your statement, not mine.  Your claim, my simple request for some valid back-up

Not some mass "right side" pointing at the "left side"

mass? where did i claim that? and if i didn't claim it, why are you expecting me to provide evidence of it?

So, who the hell is "the right side", in your both sides doing it right out of the gate claim??

 

[Christians4LessGvt]

No BT....but I think you are missing the point.

That article is basically in jest....it is saying
if you want to use an idiotic definition then
that same idiotic definition can be turned
against you. The key word again being
"idiotic definition".

[sirs]

Ahh, clarification.  Thanks, C.  Bt should try that sometime   

[Christians4LessGvt]

SIRS.....I don't like BT's style
In my mind he has a passive-defeatist style

Both articles I posted are responses to the national media Left
that quickly attempted to use this tragedy for political gain.

BT wants this assault by the Left to basically go unchallenged
so he can say "well only side is doing it".....but I think it is
important to not allow only one side to be heard. What the
hell does BT want to do while the Left tries to sell to the
American public that this is Sarah Palin's fault or the Tea Party's fault?
Why not say "using your asinine logic Tim Matthews the Left is just as much
or in my mind more at fault". I like offense.....I like to run the ball down
a bully's freakin gut...punch back harder!.....BT wants to stand around on defense....
I'm with Sean Hannity, Beck, Rush, Michelle Malkin that are going to challenge
the bullshit the Left tries at every inch....being nice gets Obamas elected.