Whose Fault Is It?

[bigrebnc1775]

Shot Congresswoman Was In Sarah Palin's 'Crosshairs'

Here's one that appears on this page of the Democratic Leadership Committee website (dated 2004 during the Bush years):

So what do you think about this map?

​

Each one of those red targets represents a “Targeted Republican” like this one:

There’s even a helpful legend that makes it clear that’s precisely what the little red targets represent:

​

You’ll never guess where I found this map. That’s right, it’s on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) website. They launched the site and the map on February 23rd of this last year, making it just over a month year old.

















Oh my!!!



The liberal Daily Kos put a bullseye on Giffords in 2008 (via HillBuzz):

​

​

So the democrats did target specific individuals with their targeted map, very interesting.

 

[Middleman]

I agree that rhetoric like having a bullseye 'on someone's back', is ill-advised, although it looks like they actually used the term "puts a bullseye on their district".

Do you all really think that using a target icon in this manner incited this incident? Or, could it be that this young manner had psyche issues that had became politically fixated?

The sad fallout from all this is that we will all face more obnoxious security, and there will be no more informal town hall meetings at supermarkets.

 

[Madeline]

I agree that rhetoric like having a bullseye 'on someone's back', is ill-advised, although it looks like they actually used the term "puts a bullseye on their district".

Do you all really think that using a target icon in this manner incited this incident? Or, could it be that this young manner had psyche issues that had became politically fixated?

The sad fallout from all this is that we will all face more obnoxious security, and there will be no more informal town hall meetings at supermarkets.

A single icon had no impact, Middleman. It's the overall trend towards using more violent imagery and speech that I think is condemnation-worthy. We have forgotten that "the thought is the father of the deed".

 

[MikeK]

Maddie, you have made it clear you do not like her, and to each their own, no big deal....

But you don't really believe the ad and the shooting have a connection, do you?

Even if it could be established that a vague, non-specific, casually uttered reference, which might be interpreted as an encouragement to violent action, did in fact provoke the Tuscon Shooter, should we allow the maniacal response of a single psychopath to an oblique and unintentional provocation to impose constraint upon our sense of free expression or to render the source of the utterance culpable in the crime?

The Tuscon Shooter is an obvious screwball whose background indicates he's been ripening over the years. If he hadn't gone off on Saturday something eventually would have provoked him to do the same thing somewhere else. He was a mass homicide looking for a reason to happen. There are others like him and if one thing doesn't set them off something else will.

 

[Middleman]

Good point, Madeline.

 

[Madeline]

Good point, Madeline.

Thankies, Middleman. I see the POV of those who disagree as well. Mebbe I just would like to believe we can all have an impact on whether such things happen, and mebbe that's an illusion.

In any event, greater civility won't kill us.

 

[MikeK]

This is how I see things: an argument has grown heated and many of us, including me, are guilty of raising the volume. Shouting, using bad language, attacking the motives of those who disagree, etc. We add to the panic and anxiety of our readers at times.

In THAT way, I think we all share some blame, and personally, I hope to do better.

Meanwhile, if the shooter really is mentally ill, I guess the law will cope. Insanity defenses are very rare, and even more rarely successful....and I would no more agree to spend time in a criminal forensic hospital than in Hell.

Madeline Theres only one person that is to blame and that is JARED LOUGHNER no one else is to be blamed.

I could be wrong, bigreb, but I think fewer deranged people would pick up a gun and shoot a politican if we didn't speak to each other with such derision when politics are discussed.

Madeline,

Because they have accumulated vast amounts of volatile emotions over the years, and because their defective reasoning ability has rendered them increasingly sensitive and receptive to what they perceive as provocation, people like Loughner may be metaphorically referred to as bombs. As long as they are moving about in the mainstream it is a matter of time until something sets them off.

If you've ever had the misfortune to interact with a paranoid/schizophrenic personality you know how readily they misinterpret the most benign and neutral comments as grave personal insults or wholly irrelevant provocations. I'm willing to wager that eventually we will learn that some forensic behaviorist has categorized Loughner as this type of screwball. As such, without having interviewed Loughner at length it is absolutely impossible for the rational mind to fathom the motive for his action because it could be something completely bizarre.

Consider David Berkowitz, the infamous Son of Sam, who went around the New York City area in the seventies shooting people with a .44 magnum because his neighbor's dog told him to do it.

So even if the entire U.S. population endeavored to carefully avoid expressing anything which might be thought of as provocative it wouldn't neutralize any of the psychological time bombs who move about among us. Because eventually something will set them off.

 

[Zander]

The shooter is neither left-wing nor right-wing. He is crazy and evil . The guy is very clearly not of the tea party movement, not a Dittohead, not led by Sarah Palin, me, or anyone else on the right. He is a wacko nut case. Nothing more.

 

[Madeline]

Madeline Theres only one person that is to blame and that is JARED LOUGHNER no one else is to be blamed.

I could be wrong, bigreb, but I think fewer deranged people would pick up a gun and shoot a politican if we didn't speak to each other with such derision when politics are discussed.

Madeline,

Because they have accumulated vast amounts of volatile emotions over the years, and because their defective reasoning ability has rendered them increasingly sensitive and receptive to what they perceive as provocation, people like Loughner may be metaphorically referred to as bombs. As long as they are moving about in the mainstream it is a matter of time until something sets them off.

If you've ever had the misfortune to interact with a paranoid/schizophrenic personality you know how readily they misinterpret the most benign and neutral comments as grave personal insults or wholly irrelevant provocations. I'm willing to wager that eventually we will learn that some forensic behaviorist has categorized Loughner as this type of screwball. As such, without having interviewed Loughner at length it is absolutely impossible for the rational mind to fathom the motive for his action because it could be something completely bizarre.

Consider David Berkowitz, the infamous Son of Sam, who went around the New York City area in the seventies shooting people with a .44 magnum because his neighbor's dog told him to do it.

So even if the entire U.S. population endeavored to carefully avoid expressing anything which might be thought of as provocative it wouldn't neutralize any of the psychological time bombs who move about among us. Because eventually something will set them off.

Yes, I know, MikeK. And I dun disagree, really. We will always have violence, some of it will be committed by the deranged, and nothing can be done to insulate us from it entirely. I accept all that.

Still, I think the way we speak to each other has grown nasty and that we'd be safer -- certainly more civilized -- if we could back off such things as death threats, etc. Our hysteria is contagious.

 

[JakeStarkey]

One's explanation that distorts the description of the image of Palin's as simply a bull's eye target site on an American map, when all know exactly what said image really looks like, reflects a morally demented POV.

Palin's map with target sites was far, far more than some simple minds are stating.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The shooter is neither left-wing nor right-wing. He is crazy and evil . The guy is very clearly not of the tea party movement, not a Dittohead, not led by Sarah Palin, me, or anyone else on the right. He is a wacko nut case. Nothing more.

I agree with that.

 

[boedicca]

It's the shooter's fault. He is responsible for his own actions.

Any other factors which influenced him are not "at fault", unless there was an active conspiracy in which others took part. Blaming ideas and the words of others is the cowardly approach used by those who advocate for the concept of Thought Crimes to suppress the opposition and competition.

 

[Madeline]

It's the shooter's fault. He is responsible for his own actions.

Any other factors which influenced him are not "at fault", unless there was an active conspiracy in which others took part. Blaming ideas and the words of others is the cowardly approach used by those who advocate for the concept of Thought Crimes to suppress the opposition and competition.

I have not called for any new laws, boedicca. Just more civility.

 

[boedicca]

The essence of what you are doing is advocating suppression of free speech because somebody somewhere might take offense.

It's intentions like yours which lead to the destruction of individual liberty.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

One's explanation that distorts the definition the image of Palin's website used to simply a bull's eye target site on an American map, when all know exactly what said image really looks like, reflects a morally demented POV.

Palin's map with target sites was far, far more than some simple minds are stating.

I should have known some Democrat would pop in and make a statement like this while ignoring the fact that his own party does the same thing.

 

[DiveCon]

One's explanation that distorts the description of the image of Palin's as simply a bull's eye target site on an American map, when all know exactly what said image really looks like, reflects a morally demented POV.

Palin's map with target sites was far, far more than some simple minds are stating.

actually, its far LESS than simple minds are stating, simple minds like you and the other leftwing moonbats here

 

[JakeStarkey]

Shot Congresswoman Was In Sarah Palin's 'Crosshairs'

Here's one that appears on this page of the Democratic Leadership Committee website (dated 2004 during the Bush years):

So what do you think about this map?

​

Each one of those red targets represents a “Targeted Republican” like this one:

There’s even a helpful legend that makes it clear that’s precisely what the little red targets represent:

​

You’ll never guess where I found this map. That’s right, it’s on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) website. They launched the site and the map on February 23rd of this last year, making it just over a month year old.

















Oh my!!!



The liberal Daily Kos put a bullseye on Giffords in 2008 (via HillBuzz):

​

​

Any images like this hurt an informed democracy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

One's explanation that distorts the definition the image of Palin's website used to simply a bull's eye target site on an American map, when all know exactly what said image really looks like, reflects a morally demented POV.

Palin's map with target sites was far, far more than some simple minds are stating.

I should have known some Democrat would pop in and make a statement like this while ignoring the fact that his own party does the same thing.

Yes, that would be wrong by any American regardless of party. You are mistaking me for yourself. Read above. Don't play for political points, QWB, because you look stupid.

 

[DiveCon]

One's explanation that distorts the definition the image of Palin's website used to simply a bull's eye target site on an American map, when all know exactly what said image really looks like, reflects a morally demented POV.

Palin's map with target sites was far, far more than some simple minds are stating.

I should have known some Democrat would pop in and make a statement like this while ignoring the fact that his own party does the same thing.

yeah, and in the very next post he says this

The shooter is neither left-wing nor right-wing. He is crazy and evil . The guy is very clearly not of the tea party movement, not a Dittohead, not led by Sarah Palin, me, or anyone else on the right. He is a wacko nut case. Nothing more.

I agree with that.

which completely disagrees with his previous post

 

[JakeStarkey]

The essence of what you are doing is advocating suppression of free speech because somebody somewhere might take offense.

It's intentions like yours which lead to the destruction of individual liberty.

The principle of individual liberty does not protect threatening or intimidating speech.