BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Jan 11 - 10:46 AM

Why are we not doing that for the mentally ill or disturbed?

Because it would be pointless since there's no way to legally incarcerate them any longer.

Next time you see Geraldo Rivera (a.k.a. Gerry Rivers) be sure to thank him.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 16 Jan 11 - 09:52 AM

Here is an idea, for what it is worth. In a school, in a doctors office, if a child shows signs of child abuse, currently they are by law required to notify social services for a follow up investigation. If a mom takes a child to the ER room and the doctor "suspects abuse", he is required to file a report with the authorities to at least check out the home and parents.

Why are we not doing that for the mentally ill or disturbed? The first act would be to remove all firearms from the home, put an NCIC lock to prevent purchase until it is checked out. And maybe just maybe some of these people would get help Would that make sense?

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Jan 11 - 04:43 AM

The difference, apparently, FFS is that I know what it means.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Jan 11 - 12:57 AM

Richard Bridge: "I am incredulous"

Well, finally we agree on something!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 11:38 PM

Pretty much mouse LOL yup, but I don't got one of those funny looking swords they use. I think I would hurt myself with that blade

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: LadyJean
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 11:14 PM

There were quite a few people in my old neighborhood who had mental health issues. BUT THEY WERE NEVER VIOLENT. There was one old dear who thought she was a nun, who was a bit of a trial to worshippers at the local Catholic church. But she was a peaceful nuisance. Most people with mental health problems aren't violent. Only a tiny minority are dangerous, and they are more so, because they have easy access to firearms.

You know it's a felony to own a ninja throwing star in California. But any nut can buy a gun.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: mousethief
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 09:49 PM

There is NO honor in war, only death

Whoa. Are you a Klingon? ;)

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: olddude
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 09:07 PM

There is NO honor in war, only death ... The individual soldier doesn't make policy, He goes where he is ordered nothing more. Have an issue with it take it up with the powers who put him or her in harms way ..

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 08:10 PM

Ya' know... Doesn't much matter who's accusations are worse than the others... At least we are talking about the way we talk...

Personally, I think the right has more cleaning up to do but, hey, if we come outta this less divisive then everyone wins...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 07:27 PM

I am incredulous.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: mousethief
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 03:26 PM

Good point, Q.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 03:03 PM

How quickly they forget http://usera.imagecave.com/donuel/don/lashingout.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 02:45 PM

Thanks to left-foot-in-mouths, sympathy for Republicans is growing. A couple of the worst examples of vitriolic nonsense can be found posted here.
(Remember 40 percent voted Republican in the last election)

Surveys show that most Americans don't think the political rhetoric was a factor in the shooting, and many said the poisonous comments were an attempt to make Conservatives look bad.
They do agree that the rhetoric on both sides has gone too far.

"Concocting connections to advance an argument actually weakens it. The argument for tonal moderation has been done a tremendous disservice by those who sought to score political points in the absence of proof."

New York Times. The Tucson Witch Hunt, Charles M. Blow, Op-Ed, January 14, 2011.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 02:22 PM

Slag.....Can a man who sanctions and supplies the funds to increase the use of "killer drones",actually be described as caring?

Dont you mean that he employs rather professional scriptwriters?

The use of drones in Afghanistan has caused the deaths of thousands of innocent people, women,children, old people, blown to pieces for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Not much hope for the mutilated either, no teams of doctors, no intensive care facility....just a stinking shitty dirt floor as an operating table.

But who cares? no memorial service for dead Iraqis or Afghanis, there may be a couple of terrorists among them, so that cancels out all the innocents.

In the great scheme of things, life means nothing to us. In our search for "Victory with Honour" the deaths of a few hundred kids are worth it.......so we can drag our sorry arses out of there with "honour"..

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 11:13 AM

Well, since it is that we are discussing I thought that Slag's comment: "...if a Democrat does it, it's smart chic, happening and creative. If a Conservative does it it's stupid, inane, mean-spirited and vitriolic." he might have been referring to it.

(Not really)

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 10:16 AM

Coherent space, perhaps; coherent correspondents are another story....

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 09:23 AM

In my latest post, insert 'sure' into a coherent space.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,Bobert in Greensboro, NC
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 07:38 AM

Paul Krugman outta stick with economics...

But sadly, intentional or not, I find it very curious that the folks who have actually been *killed* since 1963, of which there are many for their beliefs, seem to all be on the left side of the political divide..,

Yes, the "Big Three" (JFK, RFK & MLK) are well known... But when one starts Googling up other folks the list gets purdy astounding...

I mean, there members of county and city governments, doctors, security folks and nurses working at womens clinics...

So it's easy for those on the left, when yet another of their political allies is gunned down to think, "Oh, here we go again"...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 04:05 AM

Ebbs: "Slag, I am almost you are not referring to murder. Are you?"

Huh?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 03:43 AM

"DougR, don't you know by now that if a Democrat does it, it's smart chic, happening and creative. If a Conservative does it it's stupid, inane, mean-spirited and vitriolic. Come on, get with the program."

Slag, I am almost you are not referring to murder. Are you?

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Genie
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 03:41 AM

Moving right along, ...

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Slag
Date: 15 Jan 11 - 12:55 AM

DougR, don't you know by now that if a Democrat does it, it's smart chic, happening and creative. If a Conservative does it it's stupid, inane, mean-spirited and vitriolic. Come on, get with the program.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 09:58 PM

The only thing that is politically motivated, is group stupidity!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: pdq
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 07:52 PM

January 8, 2011, 3:22 pm

          Paul Krugman

Assassination Attempt In Arizona

A Democratic Congresswoman has been shot in the head; another dozen were also shot.

We don't have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was. She's been the target of violence before. And for those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind Republicans might be able to work with, might be a target, the answer is that she's a Democrat who survived what was otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona, precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist. (Her father says that "the whole Tea Party" was her enemy.) And yes, she was on Sarah Palin's infamous "crosshairs" list.

Just yesterday, Ezra Klein remarked that opposition to health reform was getting scary. Actually, it's been scary for quite a while, in a way that already reminded many of us of the climate that preceded the Oklahoma City bombing.

You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we're going to see in the months and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it's long past time for the GOP's leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.


{note: Krugman said (she, Giffords) "...might be a target...precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist...}

{note: Krugman is saying this c**p just hours after the shooting. He is taking the opertunity to bloody his usual enemies at the expense of six dead people. BTW, the judge who died was a Republican.}

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: pdq
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 07:32 PM

Mark Hemingway 01/11/11 1:15 PM

Ex-Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., pens an op-ed in the New York Times today about the proper political response to this weekend's tragedy. I wholeheartedly support the former Congressman (Kanjorski lost his seat in November) when he argues that, following this weekend's shooting, Congressman need to remain open and accessible to the public. However, Kanjorski is rather hypocritical when he climbs up on his soapbox:

"We all lose an element of freedom when security considerations distance public officials from the people. Therefore, it is incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect in which political discourse can flow freely, without fear of violent confrontation."

Incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect? Congressman heal thyself! Yesterday, I noted that, according to the Scranton Times, Kanjorski said this about Florida's new Republican Governor Rick Scott on October 23:

"That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida," Mr. Kanjorski said. "Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he's running for governor of Florida. He's a millionaire and a billionaire. He's no hero. He's a damn crook. It's just we don't prosecute big crooks."

I'll give Kanjorski the benefit of the doubt that he did not literally mean Scott schould be killed. Regardless, Kanjorski's way over the rhetorical line compared to the kinds of statements liberals are pointing to as evidence that Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh are creating a "climate of hate," to borrow Paul Krugman's phrase. And somehow I doubt that there would have been crickets from the national media if a Republican politician called for a Democratic candidate to be shot barely a week before the election.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Genie
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 06:54 PM

Wesley and DougR, ANYONE who uses really vitriolic "annihilate-them" rhetoric needs to turn it down. And, no, it's not always those on "the right" that use it. Back in 1968, a speech was given at the American Psychological Convention in San Francisco by (IIRC) Kathleen Cleaver, wife of Eldridge Cleaver, in which she repeatedly proclaimed "The gun is the answer!"   I found that sort of perspective and rhetoric disturbing even back then, and she was definitely "leftist" in her political leanings.   

But there is an important difference between simply using strong rhetoric to highlight one's opposition to a candidate or policy or law (e.g., calling a policy "atrocious" or even "criminal") and saying things like "I'd like to blow his brains out" or that citizens should "be armed and dangerous" because it's time for a "revolution." There's also a big difference between calling out someone because of something they've actually proposed or done (e.g., initiated the occupation of another country or suspended habeas corpus or authorized unwarranted wiretaps or voted to raise/lower taxes) and spewing hatred towards someone because of false or unfounded allegations (e.g., saying that "Obamacare" involves "death panels" or that Obama "wants to take your guns away" or that today's Democrats are "communists." There's a huge difference between saying that you think so-and-so should be investigated or indicted and tried in legitimate courts and calling for so-and-so's murder or assassination.

Some well-known talk show hosts, bloggers, columnists, and political "strategists" HAVE talked/written of wishing they could kill people they disagree with (e.g., Michael Moore, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, etc.)   I have heard one or two liberal talk show hosts say they "hate" the far right wing or label people like Mitch McConnell or Dick Cheney or Bill O'Reilly "Today's Worst Person In The World" but never heard any of them say they would like to kill them or see them assassinated or. I've never heard any of them suggest that guns or bombs or any sort of violence should be used against people just because their policies and politics differ.   

Let us not make the mistake of lumping all hyperbole & sarcasm & strongly worded allegations or objections together. And, please, let's not propose that everyone refrain from using emotionally charged or blunt, confrontive language when it fits.   We don't need to revert to saying things like "Holding people indefinitely in GITMO without affording them legal counsel or even charging them with any crime isn't a very nice thing to do."

But it's not valid to say that really vitriolic rhetoric, especially when it evokes images of dealing with opponents by bloodshed, does not contribute to things like shooting rampages, just because we can't draw a direct single-causal line between the rhetoric and such a violent attack.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 06:46 PM

Way to miss the point, DougR.

And way to deny reality. But what else did you expect? Ain't the first time and sure as hell won't be the last.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Wesley S
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 05:33 PM

"There is nothing in the article proving that conservative talk caused the killer to take his gun to the politial rally and shoot up the place."

And I would agree. But now that the subject has come up isn't a good idea for BOTH sides to tone it down? It's still a good thing to promote even if it didn't cause this whacko to pull the trigger.

Or we could just wait for "them" to stop first. In which case nothing will happen.

After all - "they" started it.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: bobad
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 05:15 PM

Armed bystander almost shot hero that disarmed AZ shooter

By David Edwards
Friday, January 14th, 2011 -- 1:12 pm

Maddow destroys GOP fantasy that more guns equals less violence

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/armed-bystander-shot-hero-disarmed-az-shooter/

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: DougR
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 04:18 PM

Doesn't prove a thing. The co-founder of the Tucson chapter of the Tea Party merely reported what he had said to Rep. Gifford. There is nothing in the article proving that conservative talk caused the killer to take his gun to the politial rally and shoot up the place.

Truth is, there is ample biased political talk from both conservatives and liberals to go around. The Democrats have used the same termonology (tarketing political districts) in previous political campaigns and there have been no loud calls of foul from liberals when they used it.

Sugar Foot: Conservatives in the U.S. do not constitute a danger to folks living here. We are civilized folks who obey our laws.

If you want to get a real clear picture of what vitrolic political talk is like in the U.S., tune in to MSNBC sometime.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Stu
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 11:28 AM

Shine on. Having read mousethief's link, having seen some of the stuff on Fox over here in the UK and in the papers I've come to the conclusion that conservatives (here and in the US) really are a mean, and sometimes downright nasty bunch of people - especially in a group. I mean, compassion and caring for other people that you might not be related to is NOT some left-wing failing, but a basic human necessity. I'm befuddled some people don't have it.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: EBarnacle
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 09:26 AM

Doublethink at its finest.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 08:41 AM

Way to miss the point, DougR.

Here's a tasty little number:

Tucson tea party founder says Giffords to blame for getting shot

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: DougR
Date: 14 Jan 11 - 12:31 AM

Josepp: and you have evidence that remarks by Sarah Palin or anyone else caused that nut to go on his rampage? If so, produce it.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 09:59 PM

Donny First: "According to a couple of things I've read about the shooter, his two favorite books were Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler and Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.
Not politically motivated? I wouldn't say that."

Well, Didn't you post in another thread that you were very 'Bible literate, but weren't really a Christian??

Shit happens, eh?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 08:42 PM

I agree Charley ... it is wonderful news.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Charley Noble
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 08:37 PM

I like the news that Congresswoman Giffords is able to open her eyes, move her hands and is now demonstrating that she can lift both of her legs. That is a major miracle considering what was done to her.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Slag
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 08:14 PM

Sigh, I just wish everyone was the same as I, then it wouldn't matter who owned guns, we'd all be safe. I wish everyone was as intelligent as I, then EBarnacle wouldn't have to worry tendentiously about his sesquipedalian vocabulary being lost on the heathen right. I wish we all had love in our hearts for all God's creatures, not to mention love for God Himself. I wish everyone thought as I did, did as I did and lived as I did, ad nauseum.

On the other side of the planet, I finally heard an Obama speech I could relate to. Masterful, brilliant and caring.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 08:12 PM

Our current gun laws are insane... No, beyond insane... The would be insane if Congresswoman Giffords was not shot, if Robert Kennedy were no assasinated, if Dwayne Dettman was not shot down by a friend of mine... They are insane all by themselves....

The 2nd amendment in no way gives carte blank permission for anyone to own whatever gun he or she wants... For anyone willing to actually read it as the ****one**** sentence that it is gun ownership is clearly tied to the maintaining of a militia... One person does not make up a militia... Had the amendment been 2 sentences rather than one than the NRA and the gun0nuts would be able to argue their opinions based on the Constitution... Unfortunately for them it is one sentence which, BTW, they never quote in total but quote only part of...

But even if the Founding Fathers had made it two sentences then our gun laws would still be insane...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: josepp
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 07:14 PM

///That is IF he even listened to those people, and his close friends who knew him, said he didn't get into politics...and didn't care about that shit!////

Didn't get into politics???? Did you read what he wrote? I think you're the one whose shielded from reality. This guy wrote diatribes and posted them all over the internet about how much he distrusted the govt and then he targets a congresswoman BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION FOR 3 YEARS!!! Stop trying to have it both ways. Yes, he was a VERY political person. Obviously. That he was stuck in his own weird little world is completely beside the point. He encountered the rhetoric and it got into his head and became a mission which he carried out. You'll never be able to disprove that. Whether it's true of not, it will always remain a strong possibility and it is a stain Palin and her ilk can never wash off. And they deserve that fate for resorting to that shit.

////So if he wasn't listening to it, your argument falls down..fair enough???////

Well, of course, if he never heard it then my argument fails. Boy, you must have graduated from Harvard! That's the very thing you will never be able to rule out no matter how much you want to believe it. He COULD have encountered this rhetoric--it was all over the internet, TV, newspapers and magazines. You have to wonder how he could possibly have avoided it considering how anti-govt he is. It's frankly highly improbable that he didn't encounter any of it.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Genie
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 06:16 PM

First, it's encouraging that Congresswoman Giffords is still hanging in there and conscious and has a chance at recovering perhaps a good deal of her previous functioning, and that most of the other wounded seem to be making progress too.

Second, our hearts go out to the families and friends of all those who were so senselessly killed.

Beyond that, I hope this horrible incident will help bring most of us closer to consensus on a few things or at least engage in serious, responsible dialogue about them:

~ While no one can draw a direct causal relationship between the virulent rhetoric of some politicians and media darlings and the mindset of young Mr. Loughner, when extremely divisive & vitriolic rhetoric dominates our politics & our media, portraying those who differ from us in ethnicity, religion, etc., or in political orientation as inhuman scum or impending dangers to our well-being, it's hard for anyone to escape the impact of such, whether they regularly watch TV or listen to radio or not. The ripples carry far.

~ Weapons that are capable of inuring or killing dozens or people in a matter of seconds probably do need to be less readily available not only to "convicted felons" but to others who have a history of violent outbursts and/or who have not demonstrated the know-how to curb the excesses of their use.

~ No party or political perspective or philosophy has a monopoly on hate speech or on the sensationalist abuses of our political parlance. Still, to assume from the start that "both" or "all" parties are equally in need of reining in their rhetoric" does a disservice to meaningful dialogue. We need to call out the excessive rhetoric itself when it occurs, without a preconceived notion that the 'scorecard" must "turn out' basically even.
It may not.
But no one should be deterred from using rhetoric such as "this bill is an outrage to American justice" or such and such legislation "could have disastrous consequences" or even that such and such actions would be "treasonous" or that someone "is guily of war crimes" if there's some reasonable basis for such judgments and there's no suggestion of dealing with those people or issues by other than lawful means.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 06:06 PM

According to a couple of things I've read about the shooter, his two favorite books were Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler and Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.

Not politically motivated? I wouldn't say that.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 05:44 PM

The rhetoric on both sides apparently had little to do with the Tucson shooting.

The media and agitators love to ride such speculations to death.

In the mid-19th C. Congressmen carried handguns into their chambers.
One incident frequently mentioned in histories of the time, in 1850, Sen. Foote of Miss. pulled a pistol on Sen. Benton of Missouri during a debate.
Fights with canes could be deadly, one congressman was caned so badly that he couldn't participtate again for three years.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 05:36 PM

That is IF he even listened to those people, and his close friends who knew him, said he didn't get into politics...and didn't care about that shit! So if he wasn't listening to it, your argument falls down..fair enough???

Play music. Heal!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: josepp
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 05:29 PM

/////HE TARGETTED A CONGRESSWOMAN FOR 3 YEARS
HE WENT TO EVENTS SEVERAL TIMES.////

But he didn't shoot her until AFTER she was targeted by Palin so your point is, not surprisingly, pointless. There is no way you can prove Palin's words and others did not push him over the edge.

I am not arguing politics here. The politics have nothing to do with anything. I am arguing actions and intent.

////a poll claims 2/3s of Americans believe the killer was merely a deranged lone gunman without any political affiliation, intent or knowledge.////

Obviously this is true but it has nothing to do with anything. He was strongly anti-govt and there is every reason to believe he would have given ear to the anti-govt rhetoric of extremists as Palin, Bachman and Angle. If he already disliked Giffords and then sees that these people seem think the same way and seem to be urging someone to do her in, then he might have decided to do it himself--not because he knew or cared what these people stand for but because there seemed to him to be a message to do it. Nothing more.

I strongly believe these people played a part in this incident. It is entirely reasonable for me to assume so. It is entirely unreasonable for people like you to disagree. None of our arguments against hold water.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: mousethief
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 05:22 PM

No, olddude, fistfights are NOT worse than shootings. Sorry to have to say this.

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 05:16 PM

Now that the political discourse has run itself out of credible information (read: unreliable OPINIONS), let's all blame the guns!
As it turns out, the shooter in Tucson, as more background information is being released about him, he was NOT involved with the TEA Party, he wasn't into 'talk radio', he wasn't even very political, according to his interviewed friends. He WAS known for being 'scary', even other students in his school felt uncomfortable with him in the classroom, among other things being revealed about him by people who knew him!

What is really..I mean, REALLY screwed up, is how fast the finger pointing began, followed by 'tit for tat' instances, cited by those on BOTH sides! I guess it all depended on who, or what your favorite 'news' source was.

Those who wrongly jumped on the 'Conservatives' are being thoroughly embarrassed, with every release of new information! Those on the right, are doing the 'tit for tat' rap, and showing how nasty they can be, as well!

My post:GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 03:17 AM....
...was pretty accurate. Starting, as soon as to 'NOW', as you can, after the 'light goes on', isn't it time to begin healing, our fellow brothers and sisters, who are all wound up, with 'fear and loathing'??

I know things are strained, in our country. I know things are being fanned, to play on people emotions, on both sides. I know there are fissures in our society, over things that in everyday life, people don't normally give a rat's ass about!..but I also know that many of us are musicians..some even venture into being perfectionists....why allow 'bullshit' into your filters, to work through???

I'm on YOUR side!!!..but as a musician/composer, lyricist and artist. You just can't let emotions, which are genuine, but fanned by false partisan propaganda, be an anchor to your mediocrity. You might just play a phrase, that would catch someone's heart, and open up a world of common sense, and compassion in them,.......but not if you're all torn up, worried and resentful, about stuff that wasn't even true, about this rather sad enough affair!

On some level, and sooner or later(better sooner than later), those who have the gift, to reach into where great music comes from, and touch other people, with it...soon as they can rise above the fray, and get clean, and free of it...THE BETTER YOU are playing, and focusing!!!...and of course, the more you will have to say!!!(Whether lyrically, or instrumentally,or both!).

Time is getting shorter. Snap now, and avoid the 'rush'!

Regards,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 04:52 PM

by the way, I don't think the right to bear arms was designed for the unstable and for those unwilling to get training, or the criminal .. but that is just my 2 cents. It is why me and the NRA parted company. If a sane, non criminal who gets training, I have no issue with them owning a firearm

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,oldude
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 04:26 PM

by the way, like I said before the glock is NOT the gun for a novice. With the new "rush to buy" there were be more injuries just because of accidental discharge. Like I said, no external safety on that weapon, it take a lot of training to handle a glock

Subject: RE: BS: AZ Congresswoman Giffords shot
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 04:24 PM

Desert
I have no problem at all with that proposal .. it is a sane one and anything that is sane gets my support