AZ Congresswoman in critical condition after shooting

[Riot]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

"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."

"You know, our founding fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. In fact, you know, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking towards those second amendment remedies and saying my goodness, what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out." - Sharron Angle on a radio interview last fall before the election she lost.

They are BOTH out of line. Man up, be a tough momma grizzly, shoot a caribou - they are all posers playing with fire and saying, "Oh, oh, oh, THAT'S not what I meant!"

[Princess Doreen]

The liberal agenda is caving like a $2 suitcase, and the ultra-liberal lefties are so enraged about it that they'll pull anything out of a fire in retaliation. That's what this is all about.

Hateful rhetoric on either side of the political spectrum will not be tolerated by anyone who isn't a political zealot. It's never worked in the past, and it's surely not going to work now.

Blame started being formulated before the victims of this shooting made it to the ER.

It's about the victims - not about anyone's conjecture as to who they think is to blame. The only one to blame right now is the shooter. And unless and until some information comes forward that someone else is to blame besides him, everybody should just stop speculating.

And that County Sheriff "Nudnik" is one of the most incendiary persons who has had access to a microphone. He's covering his butt because in hindsight (pun intended) he's now thinking he should have done something to protect her - a definite Captain Hindsight.

[Riot]

The liberal agenda is caving like a $2 suitcase, and the ultra-liberal lefties are so enraged about it that they'll pull anything out of a fire in retaliation. That's what this is all about.

The "liberal agenda"? Didn't they just pass tons of Democratic signature laws? How is that "caving"?

I think "what it's all about" is an effing mass murder, Doreen.

Hateful rhetoric on either side of the political spectrum will not be tolerated by anyone who isn't a political zealot.

Yup. True. Let's see where that rhetoric is coming from over the past two years ....

And that County Sheriff "Nudnik" is one of the most incendiary persons who has had access to a microphone.

Nice lack of respect you have going there. A little hateful, don't you think?

Your statement is absurdly ridiculous on it's face. It's simply and factually false. You clearly haven't listened to it, have you? How could you have, and say that with a straight face. His statement was reasoned, and did NOT attack anybody or any party specifically. He deliberately went out of his way to limit it to "some", to not be broadly accusatory.

These words, a direct quote - and watch the tape, he was carefully choosing his words and speaking calmly and slowly - is what you characterize as "most incendiary? Are you kidding?

"When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

That is the statement you characterize as "most incendiary"? That's the statement the right wing has been in screaming hysterical overdrive of "not us! YOU!" about?

What a load of ... oh, I dunno ... political zealotry?

Sheriff Dupnik has been down there as Sheriff for 40 years. He's been there through the elections, through the healthcare debate, through immigration debates, through previous attacks on this and other elected officials down there. He's watched Arizona change, and he was asked what he thought could have contributed to the murders. He knew several of the people hurt and killed. He most certainly is entitled to his very educated, professional opinion about what contributes to violence in Tuscon.

"Covering his butt" ??? You're just making nonsensical crap up out of thin air.

[Princess Doreen]

Originally Posted by Riot

The "liberal agenda"? Didn't they just pass tons of Democratic signature laws? How is that "caving"?

I think "what it's all about" is an effing mass murder, Doreen.



Yup. True. Let's see where that rhetoric is coming from over the past two years ....



Nice lack of respect you have going there. A little hateful, don't you think?

Your statement is absurdly ridiculous on it's face. It's simply and factually false. You clearly haven't listened to it, have you? How could you have, and say that with a straight face. His statement was reasoned, and did NOT attack anybody or any party specifically. He deliberately went out of his way to limit it to "some", to not be broadly accusatory.

These words, a direct quote - and watch the tape, he was carefully choosing his words and speaking calmly and slowly - is what you characterize as "most incendiary? Are you kidding?

"When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

That is the statement you characterize as "most incendiary"? That's the statement the right wing has been in screaming hysterical overdrive of "not us! YOU!" about?

What a load of ... oh, I dunno ... political zealotry?

Sheriff Dupnik has been down there as Sheriff for 40 years. He's been there through the elections, through the healthcare debate, through immigration debates, through previous attacks on this and other elected officials down there. He's watched Arizona change, and he was asked what he thought could have contributed to the murders. He knew several of the people hurt and killed. He most certainly is entitled to his very educated, professional opinion about what contributes to violence in Tuscon.

"Covering his butt" ??? You're just making nonsensical crap up out of thin air.

Clarence has toned down his rhetoric in today's interviews. Almost immediately after the shooting on Saturday, however, he stated that Loughner was inspired by conservative talk radio. He even admitted today that he spoke out of emotion rather than fact - something a law and order man shouldn't be doing.

Re his failure to protect Rep. Giffords. He knew she was a target, stated several happenings that gave out all sorts of warning signals - and I'm not talking about Sarah Palin's crosshairs graphic.

[Riot]

[

QUOTE=Princess Doreen;741545]Clarence has toned down his rhetoric in today's interviews. Almost immediately after the shooting on Saturday, however, he stated that Loughner was inspired by conservative talk radio.

Nope. He didn't.

I watched every press conference Saturday, including watching live the first one he gave, where he made the original statement (which I quoted in the previous post) and I never heard him say that.

I have never seen any replay quote of the Sheriff saying that on any news program. Have you?

Don't you think if he really said that, they would be replaying that clip all over the news?

They can't replay anything. Because he never said it.

If he did say it, please provide a direct quote or video to support your contention, and I'll gladly correct my thinking that statement is false.

He even admitted today that he spoke out of emotion rather than fact - something a law and order man shouldn't be doing.

He said that Saturday. That he did not know what caused the gunman to do it, he did not know if politics had anything to do with it, but he thinks that the violent rhetoric has gotten out of hand.

Re his failure to protect Rep. Giffords. He knew she was a target, stated several happenings that gave out all sorts of warning signals - and I'm not talking about Sarah Palin's crosshairs graphic.

Nonsensical wildazz guess with no facts in evidence. He's talked about her office being damaged. He talked about threats she'd had and the resolution of those. He said she didn't routinely have police at her Congress On Your Corner events (which she does quite regularly).

It makes more sense that he said the rhetoric statement because - first, it's true - that he's listened to the angry rhetoric for the past few years for all elected officials down there, people threatening others, people getting angry,healthcare, immigration (terribly nasty down there), saw the Judge have to have US Marshalls to protect him a while back, heard the threats against her, and then a Congresswoman he knows gets blown away in a mass murder-attempted assassination in a Safeway parking lot.

Naw, the first thing you come up with is that there isn't really any violent rhetoric, it's all about a deliberately planned misdirection attempt to the press to cover his ass.

I'll take the more logical answer, myself.

[Riot]

Here's a very telling quote from Roger Ailes, Fox News President, as reported by NBC, regarding what he told his on-air personalities Saturday about reporting the shootings:

"I told all of our guys, shut up, tone it down, make your argument intellectually. You don't have to do it with bombast. I hope the other side does that". - Roger Ailes

First, his on-air news guys don't know how to report on a breaking news story? And the way to do it is: "Shut up? Tone it down? "

And there is an "other side" in a mass murder-assassination attempt? And one would normally expect his news team to report this story "with bombast" ??

[Princess Doreen]

Originally Posted by Riot

[

Nope. He didn't.

I watched every press conference Saturday, including watching live the first one he gave, where he made the original statement (which I quoted in the previous post) and I never heard him say that.

I have never seen any replay quote of the Sheriff saying that on any news program. Have you?

Don't you think if he really said that, they would be replaying that clip all over the news?

They can't replay anything. Because he never said it.

If he did say it, please provide a direct quote or video to support your contention, and I'll gladly correct my thinking that statement is false.

He said that Saturday. That he did not know what caused the gunman to do it, he did not know if politics had anything to do with it, but he thinks that the violent rhetoric has gotten out of hand.

Nonsensical wildazz guess with no facts in evidence. He's talked about her office being damaged. He talked about threats she'd had and the resolution of those. He said she didn't routinely have police at her Congress On Your Corner events (which she does quite regularly).

It makes more sense that he said the rhetoric statement because - first, it's true - that he's listened to the angry rhetoric for the past few years for all elected officials down there, people threatening others, people getting angry,healthcare, immigration (terribly nasty down there), saw the Judge have to have US Marshalls to protect him a while back, heard the threats against her, and then a Congresswoman he knows gets blown away in a mass murder-attempted assassination in a Safeway parking lot.

Naw, the first thing you come up with is that there isn't really any violent rhetoric, it's all about a deliberately planned misdirection attempt to the press to cover his ass.

I'll take the more logical answer, myself.

Yup, he did - I saw it on Saturday and again tonight on Bill O'Reilly's The Factor. Can't find it on the internet, however. Must have gotten taken down because it's too incendiary.

Here's a reference to it - which I'm sure you'll find fault with.

http://www.examiner.com/political-bu...alk-radio-link

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Princess Doreen

Yup, he did - I saw it on Saturday and again tonight on Bill O'Reilly's The Factor. Can't find it on the internet, however. Must have gotten taken down because it's too incendiary.

Here's a reference to it - which I'm sure you'll find fault with.

http://www.examiner.com/political-bu...alk-radio-link

"The comments by Sheriff Dupnik clearly blamed conservative talk radio for inspiring Loughner,"

That is the "proof"? Some guy saying so? Yeah. That's baloney.

All the major news orgs were at that press conference where the Sheriff allegedly said that, it was televised live.

And you're saying no news organization in the world has a copy of the video of the Sheriff saying that?

How can that be? They are playing other clips from that news conference.

All the talk on the Sunday morning news shows today - Fox News Sunday, Meet the Press, Face the Nation, etc - were about "the vitriolic conversation", and nobody televises that clip?

Even Fox News doesn't televise any clip of the Sheriff saying that?

That's because he never said it. Period.

But, as Brian pointed out, the right wing hysteria machine immediately took off defending themselves. Against words that didn't mention them directly. Very telling.

Stop blaming the Sheriff for something he never said.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by Riot

"You know, our founding fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. In fact, you know, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking towards those second amendment remedies and saying my goodness, what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out." - Sharron Angle on a radio interview last fall before the election she lost.

They are BOTH out of line. Man up, be a tough momma grizzly, shoot a caribou - they are all posers playing with fire and saying, "Oh, oh, oh, THAT'S not what I meant!"

Harry Reid's day will come when he isn't elected. Unfortunately it wasn't last year.

[Nascar1966]

Was it not put on TV news that this nut job had a run in with Rep Giffords around three years ago? That would make it before Palin put up the picture of who to vote out in the elections and also was the Tea Party operating back then. Sounds like this nut job has had it for Rep Giffords for a while. My hope is Rep Giffords or some one who was shot or the family of one of the deceased people give the nut job what he deserves. A nice lethal injection instead of ending him quick make him suffer like the deceased and the injured one's are.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Was it not put on TV news that this nut job had a run in with Rep Giffords around three years ago? .

Uh, it's all over the TV news that this nut job visited a "Congress On Your Corner" meet two years ago or so. There was no "run in", other than he asked a weird question.

And I'll bet you learned that because it was all over the TV News, didn't you?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Harry Reid's day will come when he isn't elected. Unfortunately it wasn't last year.

So, Nascar, are you saying you hope Harry Reid gets shot? Yes or no?

[Riot]

Did i say he i want him shot?

Gee, no, that's why I ASKED YOU WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT. Because I don't want to assume, or put words in your mouth. I don't know your answer. So I ASKED YOU.

Is using words really this difficult?

Maybe you should STFU and take your own advice. You also want to put words into my mouth go right ahead. Your nothing but Demotard trash.

Maybe you couldn't be stupid. But I doubt that will happen.
And after all these decades, I'm still a registered Republican, thanks.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by Riot

Gee, no, that's why I ASKED YOU WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT. Because I don't want to assume, or put words in your mouth. I don't know your answer. So I ASKED YOU.

Is using words really this difficult?



Maybe you couldn't be stupid. But I doubt that will happen.
And after all these decades, I'm still a registered Republican, thanks.

Please accept my apology regarding you being a Demotard? Glad to know you have some sense in politics.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Please accept my apology regarding you being a Demotard? Glad to know you have some sense in politics.

Don't get too happy. I can't picture myself pulling a GOP lever for the next two election cycles. Have to see who shows up.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Please accept my apology regarding you being a Demotard? Glad to know you have some sense in politics.

See People with Brains vote on the issues because they can think so their registered party really does not matter. Dull people will blindly vote 1 party irrespective of the candidate. You can spot these people very simply. The dullest of the dull amongst them usually resort to name calling of the party they are against.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by jms62

See People with Brains vote on the issues because they can think so their registered party really does not matter. Dull people will blindly vote 1 party irrespective of the candidate. You can spot these people very simply. The dullest of the dull amongst them usually resort to name calling of the party they are against.

So what I wont vote Democrat anymore. The Democrats showed thier true colors and opened thier mouthes by blaming Palin and the Tea Party without an investagation being completed.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by jms62

See People with Brains vote on the issues because they can think so their registered party really does not matter. Dull people will blindly vote 1 party irrespective of the candidate. You can spot these people very simply. The dullest of the dull amongst them usually resort to name calling of the party they are against.

Calling me DULL doesnt bother me at all. I have a degree, so I must have some form of brains. Do you have a Degree?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

"You know, our founding fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. In fact, you know, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking towards those second amendment remedies and saying my goodness, what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out." - Sharron Angle on a radio interview last fall before the election she lost.

They are BOTH out of line. Man up, be a tough momma grizzly, shoot a caribou - they are all posers playing with fire and saying, "Oh, oh, oh, THAT'S not what I meant!"

I dont understand what is wrong with that quote, besides that Angle is a moron. She obviously meant take him out of office.. I dont see how it could be read any different way.

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I dont understand what is wrong with that quote, besides that Angle is a moron. She obviously meant take him out of office.. I dont see how it could be read any different way.

I agree...and apparently the voters didn't like her message.

Isn't that the way it is suppose to work?