Where is the evidence?

[MadHound]

Almost before the echoes of the gunshots dimmed, the conventional DU wisdom jumped to the conclusion the the shooter, Loughner, was influenced by the RW noise machine.

Why did people jump to this conclusion? Because the main target of his shooting spree was a Democratic Congresswoman? Well, the shooter of a Democratic president was an avowed Communist, so the target proves nothing.

Because Loughner lists Mein Kampf and We the Living as two of his most favorite books? He also lists the Communist Manifest and Brave New World as two of his other favorite books.

Because he wrote anti-government screeds? Being anti-government is not limited to the right, the left has, and does, embrace anti-government rhetoric and views.

The simple fact of the matter is that we simply don't know what Loughner's personal politics are. More importantly, we don't have a clue as to whether those politics, whatever they are, pushed Loughner towards violence.

What we do know is that Loughner was a deeply disturbed individual, one with a history of mental illness problems. Ascribing motivations to Loughner's actions is, at this point in time, an exercise in both futility and stupidity. In the haste to demonize the right, to play gotcha games, we are far too willing to forego the basic facts and wildly speculate without evidence.

Or we could continue to act like those we hate, the rabid RW, who also jump to conclusions that simply aren't there, to wildly speculate with little or no evidence, all to score some mythical, mystical political point.

The choice is up to you.

[el_bryanto]

1. OK I am in favor of looking at how we behave in response to this

That said, of course we think that some day Conservatives are going to do things like this. We have a couple of decades of Limbuagh describing Liberals as hateful enemies of America. We have Beck spinning out paranoid fantasies where we basically run everything and are heading America towards a course of Apocolyptic destruction. Limbaugh Conservatives see as evil traitors out to destroy America.

They belive that we are evil and they may not believe in their own ability to deal with us peacefully (either because of Becks frameworks or because they simply think that Government just doens't work). So while I do agree that self-examination is very useful after a tragedy like this, I know that the next time a Democratic politician is shot I will react in exactly the same way, i.e. I'll assume it's a crazed Limbaugh conservative.

Bryant

[MadHound]

5. RW nutters have already done something like this,

Of that there is no doubt. The man who shot Dr. Tiller was a rabid, religious RWer. The man who shot up the Unitarian church was a rabid RWer.

But to automatically jump to the conclusion, with no evidence, that an obviously mentally disturbed man is somehow a RWer is simply idle speculation.

Perhaps we should all engage in some self examination before jumping to conclusions.

[el_bryanto]

17. It's a natural human response

Expecting people not to respond like humans is not workable.

By self examiniation do you mean I should ignore the evidence of things like this.

"We view liberals as a threat to the founding of this country. We view them as a threat to the future. We view them as a threat to the traditions and institutions that have defined this country's greatness. We view them as people who need to be defeated, not worked with." - Rush Limbuagh

Do they see us a threat and as enemies? Yes. Is it possible they might act out on this world view? Yes.

Bryant

[Cal33]

94. Isn't it possible that people like Limbaugh and Beck are sociopaths,

who deliberately invent lies because they get paid so well
for doing so? Lying comes naturally to them, their defective
consciences don't bother them in the least. And sociopaths
have been known to even believe their own lies. I think the
blame lies more with people like Rupert Murdoch, who pay them
for lying. Of course, Rupert Murdoch could be a sociopath, too.

Then there is the problem of the large numbers of non-thinking
people in our population, who believe such propaganda and lies.
That's how the right-wingers get their votes.

[socialist_n_TN]

69. Yeah, get back with me when a RIGHT WING pol...........

is assassinated or shot and maybe I'll think about that "both sides" argument. When was the last time that happened? Reagan in the 80s? Who was VP in the 80s? List the left wing pols who've been shot on the left hand side of your paper and on the right side, list the right wingers who've been shot. Which side is larger?

Lougher was pretty disturbed, nobody is going to argue that, but who are the ones who are MOST affected by the general mood of politics? If you said the MOST disturbed, you get a gold star. If he wasn't making some sort of political statement, why did he go after a Congresswoman? There have been a lot of incidents through the years of disturbed people killing other people. How many were politicians? And finally, the shooters reading list was pretty wide ranging, but between Mein Kampf and Ayn Rand, I think it leans more towards RW and libertarian than left wing.

[Hutzpa]

78. A Gold star for saying the man is mentally disturbed

do we have any proof of that or are we buying into the same bullshit the right is selling us?

Why would anyone think that this man is mentally disturbed, a mentally disturbed individual does
not seek and kill.

He has been influenced by talk radio et al, those that have been talking about taking up arms, those
that have been talking about they want their country back have all helped influence this mans' thinking, and we are to believe that he is mentally disturbed, F*** that.


Thats for the morons to eat not me.

[socialist_n_TN]

85. That is a point. If the OP is going to ask for ............

"evidence" of political motive and not just a random act by a mentally disturbed person, then maybe s/he should be asked if he has any evidence that the guy actually WAS mentally disturbed. Maybe he was a patsy, set up to take the blame for a conspiracy. There were some early reports of others being involved after all.

And as I said in my post, disturbed or not, I can't help but believe he WAS influenced by RW hate speech.

[Iggo]

97. 'RW nutters have already done something like this...'

There's your answer. When the bullets are flying (and in the immediate aftermath), conclusions will be jumped to, based on the evidence we already have, even if it's only "It's happened already and it was bound to happen again."

We are ALL influenced in one way or another by the RW hate machine. If it looks and smells and acts like a RW assassin, then that's what I'm going with until I hear otherwise. And I repeat: When the bullets are flying, conclusions will be jumped to. There was nothing idle about that speculation.

[stray cat]

2. Opinions are not factual if no facts support them and are of little value

Neither progressives or conservatives uniformly put facts above political rhetoric -both choose manipulation over information and education. The right is far worse currently but I wish either party would embrace factual words

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bowens43]

4. the evidence of the right spouting violent rhetoric

and inciting violence is overwhelming. whether or not this particular individual was directly influenced by it is irrelevant.

[MadHound]

9. The trouble is that in our haste to demonize the right over their rhetoric,

We are hastening to pin this man's actions on the right, and doing so with no evidence. It is completely relevant.

[Zoeisright]

61. Haste? HASTE?

How many years of "don't retreat - reload" and "second amendment remedies" and gun crosshairs placed over names, addresses, and faces do you think we need to tolerate before we fight back?

For Christ's sake, grow up.

[guruoo]

136. RW has created an enviroment that encourages violence against elected leaders

and their supporters.

[Overseas]

144. I know, golly gee, there have only been about ten violent incidents against

perceived liberals in the past couple of years.

Golly gee, there were only a few windows of Democratic legislators offices bashed in in the past year.

Glenn Beck has only talked about blood running in the streets a couple of times.

Sharon Angle just talked about second amendment remedies in a metaphorical way.

Gee willikers, threats against the president are only up a few hundred percent.

[Cid_B]

16. ... and there it is...

Right there in black and white.

It doesn't matter to you whether or not the shooter was affected by the speech you deem unacceptable but rather the shooting was an opportunity to demonize it anyways....

[guruoo]

137. Exactly. nt

[Odin2005]

6. I think the Right's reaction to the events are more important that Loughner own views.

Their gut reaction was to ASSUME that the shooter was one of them, and started immediately covering their asses.

[MadHound]

13. Actually both sides first reaction was to assume.

And you know what they say about ass u me?

Why can't the motivations behind this tragedy simply be what they appear, the workings of a man who was deeply, tragically disturbed, who hadn't gotten the help he needed. If you want to pin something on the right, then pin the three decade disgrace of the right dismantling mental health care in this country.

But to jump to conclusions with no evidence, that makes us no better than the right.

[RC]

29. BINGO! Now why?

Because people on the Right, i.e.,Conservatives need an enemy to function. They need someone or something to focus on, to blame for what they perceive is wrong and needs corrected. The people on the Right have a problem excepting responsibility for themselves, their actions. The Right is where the sociopaths are, those without empathy, without feelings, emotions for others. Those that can do anything without remorse, such as justifying cold blooded, face to face killing.

Whenever any nut goes off and does something destructive, it is natural to assume the person is a conservative. There is a lot of evidence to back this up.
So when someone who is not a conservative does something destructive it comes as a surprise to most people, no matter which way they lean. And that is what happened here.

[Chimichurri]

7. Democrats and Communists have very differing views. By your logic

you must be a republican because you're using right wing talking points in colluding the two.

[MadHound]

19. What, asking for evidence is now a RW talking point?

So I take it you have no evidence, and are just blowing hot air at this point.

[BzaDem]

8. K & R.

While I think now is as good a time as any to encourage Republicans to tone down their "second amendment remedies" rhetoric and variations, I agree that there isn't evidence linking this to any kind of partisan agenda (and plenty of evidence that at least suggests it was not so linked).

[HereSince1628]

10. We are impatient to find safety, even if it's just peace of mind

We are impatient to feel safe, so we activate beliefs that give us a sense of psychic safety.

We can and do blame guns, the laws that make them available, the environment of fear of our fellow citizens that makes guns necessary...We blame extremist rhetoric and it's frequently jingoistic nature of calls to battle against 'the other party', eliminating political enemies, blame mentally ill, blame mentally ill for being more easily manipulated by extremist rhetoric than the rest of 'US" (a phenomenon that is unproven, but comfortable separates 'us' from 'them.'

In short we need a scapegoat to blame for our anxiety and from whom we can feel distinct and separated. This pscyhological need applies to many levels of our lives. We not only need loving and caring gods in our pantheon, we need devils to blame when things get threatening.

As you will probably be able to see in replies to this op, challenging an activated psychic defense results in irritability and aggressiveness in apparently mentally WELL people who need to psychically distance themselves from the danger.

[One_Life_To_Give]

21. Fascinating

Not something I would normally think about. I like your explanation. Thanks

[Nye Bevan]

11. ••• HE WAS A BAGGER I JUST KNOW IT •••

••• ARREST PALIN NOW •••

••• WHO NEEDS EVIDENCE WHEN I HAVE THESE COOL BLACK CIRCLES •••

[purrFect]

12. you left out a long list of recent violence from the right

detailed here...
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/terror-arizona-just-another-isolated

people being encouraged by leaders to use their guns as a remedy, it is not surprising that they do, and have done so, makes it very reasonable to think that may have influenced this disturbed young man.

think about it...

FYI: There is evidence in his postings that he spouts many of the same things that the far right do, as noted by the southern policy law center. so it is disingenuous to claim there is no evidence of RW ideology.

[MadHound]

22. But none of those incidents were related to Loughner,

Nor is there any evidence that they effected his motivations. The only thing that is certain is that Loughner is a deeply disturbed individual, one of the tens of thousands of untreated mentally ill in this country. If you want to pin something on the right, then pin the fact that the 'Pugs have pulled money for mental health for decades now. Pin the ongoing relaxation of gun controls laws in this country, to the point that a mentally ill individual like Loughner was able to legally purchase a gun. Those are backed up by solid evidence.

But to try and pin motivations on an incident without any real evidence, that's an exercise in futility.

[purrFect]

25. the southern poverty law center see's RW links in his online postings - so there is some evidence

so please don't try to claim there is no evidence.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/01/09/who-is-jared-lee-loughner/

[MadHound]

27. Where, show me

He has posted that his is anti-government, got news for you, many on the left are anti-government as well.

Show me the evidence, not just the rhetoric. Let's get this cleared out here and now.

[purrFect]

28. link

At this early stage, I think Loughner is probably best described as a mentally ill or unstable person who was influenced by the rhetoric and demonizing propaganda around him. Ideology may not explain why he allegedly killed, but it could help explain how he selected his target.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/01/09/who-is-jared-lee-loughner

also, i noticed that he seemed to rail against folks in his district not using grammar correctly... i took that as an attack against the immigrant community and i don't understand why it hasn't been given more attention.

i just typed his quote from his first you tube video titled 'Hello'...

Secondly, my hope - is for you to be literate! If you're literate in
English grammar, then you comprehend English grammar. The
majority of people, who reside in District-8, are illiterate -
hilarious. I don't control your English grammar structure, but you
control your English grammar structure.

(emphasis mine)

[MadHound]

34. Sorry, but that is a speculative piece,

Not one that has any value as concrete evidence. Even the author, time and again, admits that he is speculating.

At best, Loughner's rhetoric is confused and contradictory, to the point where no clear message can be taken from it.

As far as Loughner's language and grammar rant goes, yes, that might be directed at immigrants, it also might simply be frustration that people in his community aren't using language the same way he is using language. He seems to be trying to break the bonds of language in his writings, so his crack about grammar could be out of sheer frustration.

[purrFect]

38. So is yours, i will go with the opinions of the SPLC over an anonymous poster everytime

good day

[MadHound]

41. What is my speculation?

Not speculating at all, simply wanting concrete facts. Yet you resort to personal insults and speculation pieces. That tells me all I need to know right there.

[Bluenorthwest]

59. So what are you, the defense attorney and is this the trial?

A mature view would of course understand that we do not have the evidence, such evidence is not yet public. The trial is where we look at evidence. The jury is who hears it.
Right here and now, you can not clear up anything. You have no facts, no one else does either. I know the costume comes with robe and gavel, but the internet is not the judge, nor the jury, nor the prosecution, nor the defense.
Evidence? Do you have access to the evidence? Or just to your opinion about what everyone else also hears in the media?
A pretense of rationality is not the same as rationality. Calling for evidence that no one has save those who really are involved is cute dramatics, but absurd. Evidence and media rumors are not the same things at all.

[MadHound]

81. So since neither side has any concrete evidence of motivational factors,

We are now free to engage in baseless accusations that have no factual basis? Is that what you're saying.

What I'm saying is that the mature thing to do would to be to dispense with the baseless accusations and politicization of a such a horrible act until all the facts are known.

[socialist_n_TN]

76. The Left is anti CAPITALIST................

or anti corporatist, NOT anti government. That's almost an exclusively libertarian/RW position today. If somebody offs one of the Koch brothers, THEN I'll think it's a leftist. When somebody goes after a politician, ESPECIALLY a Democratic politician, even a blue dog Dem, I'm going to think RW/Libertarian.

[MadHound]

82. Actually it isn't,

Both the liberal and conservative ends of the spectrum are anti-government.

[socialist_n_TN]

87. We'll agree to disagree.........

If you're left antigovernment, you probably an anarchist. And there aren't many of those around.

[Jakes Progress]

14. Golly. All the talking points so concisely put.

You must be proud.

[MadHound]

35. No, the only thing that I'm proud about is living in a fact based, evidence based world

Apparently that's difficult for many around here.

[olegramps]

91. You are appeaing to have a smug superiority not enjoyed by others.

I don't believe that people on this board are saying that there is absolute evidence that this person was directly influenced by Palin's inflammatory rhetoric. That remains to be seen. But that the hate message expressed numerous times by Palin and the likes of Limbaugh and Company is something of a magnitude that it can not be discounted as the Right Wing has attempted to do. I think that I would be amiss if I did not believe that it could possibly be a factor and fearful of the violence that Palin could incite. The sad thing is that the Republicans have failed to condemn this tactic and in fact by their silence have encouraged these irresponsible leeches.

[Jakes Progress]

141. You live in your own world all right.

I wouldn't try to call it fact or evidenced based though. How about whim and whimsey based?

[Lucinda]

15. I recc'd but you're still at 0

Thanks for the post. It's been an enlightening few days 'round here.

[Catherina]

18. My dear MadHound. Thank you for being a voice of reason. Rec'd. n/t

[Octafish]

20. The shooter of a Democratic president was painted as a communist by rightwingers.

It was, as Donald Rumsfeld pointed out, a rush to judgment.

The preponderance of evidence shows Lee Harvey Oswald was an agent of the United States Government, who posed as a communist as part of his official work. Philip Melanson and John M. Newman have done much work to document the connections.

[larkrake]

40. Oswald did not kill Kennedy

any more than one bullet killed him and wounded Connelly

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

23. In an Arizona hospital bed.

:thumbsdown:

[MadHound]

37. So I suppose Reagan having gone to a hospital bed in March '81 from an assasin's bullet

Proves that Hinckley was a rabid RWer, right?

Oh, wait, Hinckley was doing this out of his obsession for Jody Foster, no politics involved.

But because a Dem is gravely wounded, we automatically thing the shooter is a rabid RWer. Large conclusion to jump to, especially given the abundant evidence of Loughner's disturbed mental state.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

101. OT, the Hinckley's were RW'ers.

As for Loughner, the site, the subject, the anti-semitism and the ranting are conclusive.

[Stevenmarc]

24. No conclusions were jumped at DU.

Because it doesn't really matter at the end of the day what really influenced Loughner, what matters most is that the Right Wing caused themselves to look guilty by scrubbing websites of the very material that could cause a nutcase to go off on someone.

It was the Right Wing that jumped to that conclusion first and they went into full defensive mode. It's the actions of Republicans that caused their own problems.

[Johonny]

30. I agree, it's a strawman

sure a few on this board may have jumped. But pretty much ever major liberal politician and every major liberal pundit has said there isn't enough evidence to say he was influenced. However it is clear the atmosphere of violence was there this past election and after this event, do you want to be the politician or pundit that looks like they advocate violence in politics? One party has said and done the right things, one party has turned around and created a strawman and used it to try to gain political advantage. I believe the poster is confusing which party is doing which.

[Gold Metal Flake]

48. +1

[fascisthunter]

26. I Hate to Say This, But You are Enabling Right Wing Rhetoric

as long as there are those on our side deflecting accountability of the right wing, nothing will change, but instead it will get worse. Thanks.

[MadHound]

31. Asking for evidence of the shooter's motivation is now enabling the RW?

Wow, the language and perceptions around here are getting more Orwellian all the time. Not to mention very self important, because while DU is a great little site, its effects on the the real world outside range somewhere between very little and nada.

[fascisthunter]

36. no, because you marginalize Sarah's responsibility in This

When politicians speak the way they do, and then put up campaign adds targeting a politician that eventually gets shot in the head, there is very good reason to blame her.

[MadHound]

39. Do you have any evidence that Palin's speech or actions influenced Loughner?

No, you don't.

In your haste to score talking points and political points, you are jumping to conclusions that aren't based in fact.

[fascisthunter]

43. scoring points... this is no fucking game... people are dead

and everyday we hear lies blaming the left for everything in this country on a daily basis through tv, radio and online. Wake the fuck up...

how dare you compare us to the right wing....


read, we are done:

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2011/01/lets-get-this-straight.html

[seabeyond]

46. " this is no fucking game... people are dead"... this is what it is feeling like. nt

[MadHound]

51. You are now accusing me of making the equivalency argument, I'm not, never have

I'm perfectly aware that the rhetoric on the right is much more inflammatory than the rhetoric on the left.

But that's not my point, what I am asking for is evidence that rabid RW politics actually caused Loughner to go out and kill, as opposed to the more obvious motivation, his deeply disturbed state of mind.

So far I've gotten lots of speculation, insults and ad hominem attacks, but no evidence. That tells me something.

[fascisthunter]

62. ok

[larkrake]

47. There is no proof her hate didnt influence him

but his blather is more in line with Beck- who praises her continually. Looking at his reading, the man was searching for someone to believe in, someone to agree with. Can you prove it wasnt Palins loaded ravings that gave him the final push? No.

We all know who has used the topic of revolution and erasure in their speeches. The target map speaks to the insane.

[MadHound]

57. Double negative, logical fallacy, please try again.

Please try to be more logical in your arguments, asking somebody to prove the negative is a logical fallacy, as you probably well know.

So did the target map the Dems put out in '04, did that speak to the insane?

[Zhade]

65. Did that map have CROSSHAIRS? No. So now you're making a false equivalence.

I'm very disappointed to find that this is probably the only time I've had a major disagreement with one of your posts. It's highly disengenuous, not to mention unlikely, to believe that violent rhetoric about literally killing liberals over the years wouldn't have influenced someone this mentally unstable.

I appreciate your call for reasoned analysis, but I think you go too far by suggesting there's no evidence he was influenced. She was crosshaired, he shot her -- it's pretty apparent there was influence, since she IS laying in a hospital bed.

Out of long-standing respect, I won't unrec this, but I sure won't rec it either.

[Broderick]

70. I just don't understand

how anyone can assume he saw it, was driven by it, influenced by it by any standard. Was it wrong? I don't know - was the intention to motivate followers to target for assassination or was it to target soft districts. To understand the logic, you have to assume he saw it, studied it, used it as motivation to go on a shooting spree. There is no indication whatsoever that he did. None. I don't see Palin bumper stickers, memorabilia, posters, etc. at this point to think logically that he was a Palin fan. Nobody has come forward to say he was a rabid right wing fanatic hell bent on killing a moderate to centrist Dem. The only thing I have seen is that he feels she didn't answer his question in 2007 to his liking on words having no meaning. Not defending Palin, but just saying.

[MadHound]

89. No, that map had targets same diff. The implication of such symbols is the targeting of individuals

Or congressional districts, etc. Frankly our entire society is filled with such rhetoric and symbols, stores "target" low prices in print ads, shooting down targeted high prices in TV car ads, etc. etc.

You respect my position, thank you. But the fact is that there is no evidence, none, that he was influenced by RW rhetoric. Can you glean that from his You Tube pages? His reading list? His conversations? I certainly can't, and some of those that knew him best thought that he was coming out of left field, not right field.

To speculate in anything else is to simply engage in baseless, politicized speculation that could very well turn out to be untrue. What I'm asking for is that we stick with evidence based speculation, but apparently, judging from many of the responses to this thread, that's impossible for many folks.

[Cetacea]

129. " a great little site"

It's so little that Rush and others feel the need to mention it .

[AldebTX]

32. It Seems We Want to Try So Hard

to understand the other side. If the case were reversed and the shooter was a liberal "tree hugger", they would be jumping all over progressive's cases. The proof in this is how sites like Drudge tried to label the shooter as a liberal.

This excusing the other side and calling for us to rise above might make us better then the other side, but ultimate it also weakens us and makes us look weak.

[Pathwalker]

33. Just what we need, more sanctimony, more scolding, more blaming US!

How dare WE react, how dare We cast asparagus, after TWENTY people were shot! I don't give a damn WHAT conspiracies that young man believed, I don't care whether HE is politically left right, up or down. I do know, because I HAD 2 mentally ill brothers - both now deceased, thankfully without taking anyone else's life, that hateful words spewed by preachers, family members, and other screechers on the airwaves are taken far more literally, far more seriously than by the sane. It is oh so easy to claim the high road after the fact, scolding the mourners for their anger, especially if pictures of you have never been placed atop an American flag along side other DEAD family members and then set ablaze when your brother burned down the family church! AFTER listening to family members tell him why I must be dead to him!
We don't know what that sick young man's motives were - and neither do you! All we know is what little LE has allowed us to see - the REST will be used as evidence against him at his federal and state trials. But telling us that we are "acting just like the RW" is pure and utter bullshit, unless you can show me where we're demanding the deaths of conservatives, or saying WE are the real victims of what happened, like Sarah Palin. You can't. For most here, there was no personal connection to what happened Saturday - I spent THREE fucking hours waiting to hear from my cousin - who was IN that shopping center when it happened - hiding in the back room of a store with her husband, and other customers!!!!
You think I give a damn what his politics were? NO! But I'll be damned if I'll ever think people saying he's a right winger is equally bad as saying all liberals must die. This false equivalency BULLSHIT MUST stop!

[MadHound]

45. I said nothing about false equivalency, all I want is solid evidence

Instead you give me more speculation and vitriol. Tells me a lot.

Oh, and don't think that you're the only one who has ever had to deal with mental illness in the ones you love. You're not, and you don't have a monopoly on that experience. Try having your own, desperately mentally ill father shove a shotgun in your face, not once, but twice. Perhaps then we can start talking about crazy.

[Broderick]

50. Evidence has no value

when the lynch mob follows the pied pipers off the cliff. I fear all of this will do nothing more than backfire once again. These mythical points earned driving down field for a touchdown will likely result in the pass getting intercepted. sigh. Just my opinion.

[BzaDem]

60. I think evidence does have value. The whole question is whether the "lynch mob" DID follow the

"pied pipers off the cliff," or whether the shooting was caused by some other reason. To answer that question, one must look at evidence.

[Broderick]

63. And that is the point of the op

I see nothing but very loose assertions based on political opportunism and no real proof he was guided by anything other than a perceived slight in 2007 because she didn't answer his question to his liking. I find his belief in chaos and the nihilism description a friend gave interesting. If he targeted her politics, she was rather centrist and no liberal. His question to her was about words having no meaning and he didn't like her answer. Did he think he was in his lucid dream state where he could be evil when he rampaged? Who knows. I agree with the op though, and his motives are relatively unknown at this point. I hope he talks once he gets help.

[BzaDem]

64. Ah, sorry. Misinterpreted your reply. n/t

[Pathwalker]

53. My mentally ill Daddy "just" molested me. So, yeah, I know nothing.

I was also branded and repeatedly beaten by my pyro brother - so yeah, I know nothing. My other brother only TRIED to rape me, but by then I was big enough and angry enough to fight back, so yeah, I know nothing, even if my pyro brother's insane antics made the news. You have no problem assuming what I know or don't know about crazy- why just give yourself that right? Because it makes you think you're higher and mightier? Like I said - whatever REAL meaningful evidence, if any, exists of his political leanings will be shown at his trials. Til then, keep saying WE are just like the right wing - those were YOUR words, so no speculation is needed.

[datasuspect]

139. what constitutes evidence in this case?

evidence that will satisfy you and make you stop parroting rw talking points?

[seabeyond]

49. more than plus +1. nt

[HuckleB]

133. +1,000,000,000,000 ... +

Yes, how dare we acknowledge that evidence does exist?

A Dem in AZ was shot, after facing ugly criticism for her votes on HCR, as well as her criticism of the AZ immigration bill. She had spoken out against Palin's ugly attacks. She had shared her fears. She had just been through a campaign against an opponent who used events such as this: "Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly."

See: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/flashback-gi... for more.

Further, we were given information, and that information stands, even if some ignore it.

Jared Lee Loughner: erratic, disturbed and prone to rightwing rants
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/09/jared-lee-l...

Finally, knowing the MSM, we can also make a safe assumption that if he were on the left, they would have advertised that fact loud and clear.

Nothing is set in stone, but it makes no sense to pretend that there is no evidence to date.

[Pathwalker]

134. And liberals call women who've had abortions terrorists, all the time, too.

Oh wait, we DON'T. Certainly nothing right-wing about that, right? :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[woo me with science]

42. Recommended. nt

[Broderick]

44. Rec

[cali]

52. +1000

[Upton]

54. Recommended

[MilesColtrane]

55. I rec'ed.

[PBS Poll-435]

56. Hmmm

A white male, aged 18-30 in conservative Arizona targeted a Democratic Congresswoman for assassination.

He has extensive rants on "currency" and English "literacy".

He used a gun to shoot 20 people at an event that represents our democratic representation. (a mini town-hall).

Oh, and since the election of the President, the political rhetoric of the Tea Party/Right Wing has referred very often to violence. (Even before the 2008 election, at a campaign rally, some old hag yelled "kill him" referring to then Senator Obama).

Sharron Angle referred to "2nd Amendment Remedies".
Sarah Palin's PAC used scope marks on Democrats who voted for the Health Care Law.

[Zoeisright]

58. NO. Calling out the haters and forcing them to take responsibility

for their violent and hateful words is NOT the same thing. It behooves civilized people to identify and call out those who promote violence. To do otherwise is cowardly.

You're wrong.

[jtown1123]

66. Are you a licensed psychologist? Loughner has not been diagnosed and unless you are his dr.,

we still don't know anything. Just weird ramblings. I know a lot of people who like to stir the pot with their reading choices, criticisms of society, etc. They are not mentally ill. Let's wait and see what the doctor's say. We don't know if he was a Palin or Rush fan but we do know he attempted to assassinate a political figure.

[seabeyond]

73. another point. lets all ASSUME the guy crazy without EVIDENCE as we namecall anyone

who points to the rights rhetoric

the hypocrisy on this thread is amazing.

lynch mobs. as bad as rabid right...

i really understand how those saying this would assume words dont matter, or dont give a shit if they think they do matter.

[jtown1123]

84. I agree. At this point, it's true we don't have all the facts. Was he mentally ill? Who knows.

Was he a Palin fan? Who knows.

What this story has brought to everyone's attention is the disgusting language and reaction of the tea party. That Palin map with cross hairs was horrible. I didn't even know it existed before this. This is a discussion we should be having anyways. Sad it had to come to the forefront in such a manner.

[hack89]

67. Rec. nt

[hack89]

68. Lynch mobs don't need facts and evidence. nt

[seabeyond]

72. lynch mobs???? are we talking lynching anyone on the right? rabid as rwers and lynch mobs

i bet yawl really dont believe words adn civility matters.

[hack89]

75. Ok - irrational, emotional groups of people don't need evidence. nt

[seabeyond]

93. ah, and in my opinion you are an appeaser, and enabler that has evidence from all direction and

ignore it purposely so you can continue to be an appeaser and enable. and refuse the logical.... or, rational perspective.

see how easy it is to denigrade anothers opinion.

[hack89]

99. Enabling the truth requires facts and a honest assessment

in that regard I am an enabler. Your actions are best proof that you have no hard fact behind you - if they existed you would present them. Unless you are confused on what constitutes real facts as opposed to opinion?

[seabeyond]

103. i have presented them over time and yet still i see where is the evidence... you are as bad as rabid

rwers, lynch mob, irrational, hater, political hacks, emotional.

a whole lot of name calling.

no, on this threads, days after i figure you all know the info, so why present it. you chose to see that as not a reason to call out the right. others see it as an opportunity to say no to hateful, violent rhetoric.

so i am addressing the hypocrisy of these threads. you know.. the call for evidence. where is your evidence the person is nuts? oh wait.... you have no hard conclusive evidence. just all signs point to it.

telling people who think different to shut up thru insults and demeaning descriptions is different from rw how?

you will probably ignore the points i make. and continue on with demeaning name calling in order to yell.... see you give no evidence. totally skipping over the reason i REFUSE to once again, line it out for you. it is as good of evidence as is assuming the guy is nuts

it is ok for you.... the rest of us are merely lynch mobs as bad as what we hate, the rabid right.

[olegramps]

98. The only people that I have heard inciting lynch mobs has been the irresponsible Right Wing.

I don't have to post them again since quotes from those such a Coulter, Limbaugh, etc. and Palin herself are factual evidence of their incitement of violence.

[hack89]

100. While lynch may be a poor choice of words, there certainly is a mob mentality here at DU. nt

[seabeyond]

104. then do i get to declare that people that start threads like this, and participate such as yourself

is a MOB, too?

or is that just for the people that have a differing opinion from you

[hack89]

106. The irrational frothing at the mouth posters

make it a mob. I have no problem with those who present their ideas rationally and are willing to accept opposing views - unlike you.

[seabeyond]

107. ah. because i call you on lynching, you had lots of assumption. you seeing frothing going on

i dont know how you see frothing. or is this just more of your own frothing.... about those that dont agree with you

this discussion just becomes more and more parallel with the whole.

because i challenge you on comments of lynch mob, irrational, emotional, frothing, and mobs, i have the problem listening to others? but not you?

carry on

i am done.

[hack89]

113. It's not about you

it is a comment on the general mood at DU. You were done a long time ago - you just didn't realize it.

[seabeyond]

115. it is you and op calling out all that dont agree with you

with names and descriptions meant to demean, degrade, dismiss.

it is like arguing about the violent rhetoric and sarahs map. no really, not cross hairs, really survey marks. whatevah

[hack89]

116. I thought you were done? nt

[Turborama]

71. Climate of Hate

Read it, if you haven't already: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[olegramps]

102. I can ony hope that Mad would read this.

Little more can be added.

[slackmaster]

74. It's deliciously ironic that one of the most steadfact voices of reason on DU is called MadHound

K&R

:kick:

[woo me with science]

145. +100000 nt

[jeepnstein]

77. Insanity knows no political boundary.

I'm thinking his political philosophy was probably as twisted as his actions indicate.

It'll be interesting to get a chance to hear what he has to say in court.

[mmonk]

79. What evidence do you have that all the calls for second amendment

remedies and the gun toting protests against tyranny that the health care bill was supposed to represent and all the anti-government rhetoric played no role on an emotionally or mentally disturbed individual? Where is your evidence there was no environmental factors?

[Lucian]

80. Have you been sleeping under a rock for the last 30 years?

[grahamhgreen]

83. The shooting is the evidence. All the RW hate spewed since Bush is the evidence.

You are really asking for proof.

[A wise Man]

86. Hmmmmmmm......

carrying guns to open town meetings (no you are not crazy)? Listening to Rush limbaug, Glenn Beck, Michelle Barkman, Hennity, Bill O'Rielly, and of course CRAZY SARAH.....(NO YOU ARE NOT CRAZY). Loughner just sit in a dark corner most of his life not listening to any of the above...no news....no TV nor radio or read a paper. He just picked up a gun and went out to shoot people. Not there is no evidence of anyone incouraging HIM. "GIVE ME A BREAK". Why is it that so many are affraid of the obvious?

[purrFect]

88. Evidence of Anti Immigrant Views (LINK)

i noticed via his youtube video that he seemed to rail against folks in his district not using grammar correctly... i took that as an attack against the immigrant community, as well as a common RW screed, and i don't understand why it hasn't been given more attention.

i just typed his quote from his first you tube video titled 'Hello'...
http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10

Secondly, my hope - is for you to be literate! If you're literate in
English grammar, then you comprehend English grammar. The
majority of people, who reside in District-8, are illiterate -
hilarious. I don't control your English grammar structure, but you
control your English grammar structure.

(emphasis mine)

[Broderick]

90. His grammar

didn't seem too good to me, and heck, I see lots of grammar police here at times. What his fascination with grammar was, I have no clue. I think had he said he had a language issue I would agree - or perhaps that is what he meant. Definitely odd to me at best.

[seabeyond]

92. there is a RW group that feels the govt uses language to control. nt

[Broderick]

95. Not familiar with it

But I was just remarking that grammar and language are not mutually exclusive so I am unsure he meant that as anti-immigrant. If he was talking about grammar, there was something I read that he liked to dwell on government mind control and words having no meaning. He wanted to create his own language in addition to his unique currency. Loner may be closer to the truth considering he couldn't keep a job or stay in school - hence his language and currency concerns perhaps.

[purrFect]

96. he seems to have an issue with folks who don't use english correctly, usually directed at immigrants

the RW talk about it all the time, and so does he, in his very first video, and directs it to people who live in his district, a place where anti-immigrant attitudes is on display at the highest levels.

it stands out to me, and caused me to mention it to my wife, an immigrant, so I may be a bit more sensitive to these attitudes than others.

[Cetacea]

130. So he's a grammar nazi?

With an racist bent?

[Jefferson23]

105. It's there and in ample amounts, here to start::

Drew Westen
Drew Westen Psychologist and neuroscientist :
As a psychologist, I find it remarkable that we’re having this discussion at all, especially in light of both the weight scientists put on prediction – Gabby Giffords’ own interview at the Capitol during the election when she warned that Palin putting people like her in the crosshairs has “consequences”— and what we know about what neuroscientists call priming, the influence of a prior stimulus on a later reaction, usually unconsciously...

http://www.politico.com/arena/archive/what-should-obama...

[Upton]

111. Where is the evidence

that Loughner specifically was incited by Palin or any other political figure? Oh, and you might check your link..

[Jefferson23]

112. You believe the man lived under a rock? What the Congresswoman respresented

to him was more than a passing distaste, that we know already. If you believe political hateful violent messages need
to be found not only for years through our MSM but selected in the shooters harddrive, we disagree on what consitutes
evidence.

[Cetacea]

108. I will fight for the right of the menatlly ill to self defend

And that means that they should have the right to have guns, just like everyone else. Unless of course it can be demonstrated that the mentally ill are more violent than everyone else.

[ecstatic]

109. The evidence is the past two years

Pay attention.

[seabeyond]

110. well, i challenge that if a person disagrees with your conclusion they're as bad as hated rabid rwer

i understand you look at this situation differently than i do. i think there are consequences with your perspective. but that is cool enough. we see it differently. i also know that you really have no desire for an answer to your question, since there is more than enough thread after thread. that this was really an op to degrade, dismiss fellow duers.

that is all

[MadHound]

118. Ah, so you're reading minds now, and now know everybody's motivation for everything,

Including my motivation for making the OP. Words fail me in the glow of your oh so enlightened self. It is apparent that you know me and my motivations far better than I know myself.

Or you could just be full of shit and talking out your ass because you disagree with my OP and will use every single despicable tactic and smear you know in order to belittle what I say.

[seabeyond]

119. yes, i do disagree with calling duers comparable to rabid rwers because they disagree with you. nt

[MadHound]

121. Did you even read what I said?

Here is the quote that has got you so hopped up, in full context.

"Or we could continue to act like those we hate, the rabid RW, who also jump to conclusions that simply aren't there, to wildly speculate with little or no evidence, all to score some mythical, mystical political point."

Nowhere was I "calling duers comparable to rabid rwers because they disagree with you." I was simply stating that we could continue to act like those we hate.

But as you have amply proven in this thread, facts, evidence, none of that matters to you. And ironically, you continue to prove my point with almost every post of yours. Congrats.

[seabeyond]

122. you see it as wild speculation, no evidence to score mythical political point. conclusons drawn

people who disgree with you dont see wild speculation and no evidence, and their opinion is not about mythical mystical political points. you did not chose those words specifically to belittle people that view this differently? because reducing anyones opinion to mytical and mystical sound belittling to me.

now, lets talk evidence. this demand for hard core, gotta know evidence. you know, the stuff that if you dont have, you are belittled by you.

the video of the friend that hasnt seen his friend in two years. look at your response on that thread. the assumption you can take for a fact the shooter did nothing in way of stepping into the political arena in TWO years is "wildly speculate with little or no evidence" (and the is fact, because there is no way you know the two years in shooters life, not even differing opinion), so i guess that makes you "act like those we hate, the rabid RW, who also jump to conclusions that simply aren't there".

[MadHound]

123. AHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You mean that one post, in that one thread, where I point out that Loughner was motivated by the demons in his own head? That's what you're jumping on.

Well gee, let's see here. Friends, college faculty, family, acquaintances have all pointed out that Loughner was deeply disturbed. Not one of them has pointed out that he listened to Beck, Limbaugh, et al.

But what's even more disturbing is that you're now following me around from thread to thread in order to try to belittle and insult me. That is against the rules here, such trolling is, so I suggest that you dial it back, OK. I don't appreciate your baseless bile and personal insults popping up in every thread I post on. What's next, you're going to follow me into the lounge?

[seabeyond]

125. the video of the friend, that you say, see non political. even though kid hadnt seen friend for

two years.

you have no idea if shooter became political, leaning either way, or watching news.

and i posted on that thread well before you did. you follow me? nah, that would delve into paranoia

[EstimatedProphet]

114. What I know is that it doesn't matter

The point of the extreme rhetoric is not to create an army of rightwingers to attack the left, although that may happen eventually. The point is that it makes EVERYONE afraid, and the people who profit off of fear reap the rewards.

[Zax2me]

117. Congrats, Madhound!

For being a sound voice and what is best about this forum. You aren't the only one which makes this place so enlightening to visit.
You may not always be right, but you were spot on here -
http://abcnews.go.com/US/tucson-shooting-friend-jared-loughner-speaks-motive-alleged/story?id=12597092

[madokie]

120. We know

You don't have to accept that but we know

[Common Sense Party]

127. What do you know?

[madokie]

128. That he is a deranged suspected murderer

Out of curiosity what was you expecting me to say?

[Common Sense Party]

132. I were expecting you to say what it were you know. n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

124. Whew....

Just in time...we were dangerously close to having a moment of solidarity here.

[Common Sense Party]

126. Evidence? We don't need no stinkin' evidence!!!

Personally, I think it was 'Aesop's Fables' that pushed him over the edge.

The bottom line is, good people here WANT him to be a TeaBagger, because we HATE teabaggers.

We WANT him to act on marching orders from Palin because we HATE Palin.

We're willing, then, to accept any scrap of innuendo that suggests--in the most tenuous or preposterous way--that Loughner is a rightwinger.

And we reject out of hand ANYTHING that doesn't fit into our pre-conceived "the right wing made him do it" narrative.

We're looking foolish, but that's the nature of DU.

[Zax2me]

138. I wouldn't say foolish....

But it is not....attractive?
Atheist, flag burning videos, ex-friends saying he didn't listen to political talk radio...Nothing here that we KNOW suggests palin robot. Still, the excuses and spin and head in the sand continues. Maybe some of it is if he isn't a far-right wacko that must mean he will be perceived as a liberal or progressive. Which everyone would agree I'm sure is NOT the case.
I'm finding it best just to not engage on this topic. It will probably be another six months before I am at such odds with the GD forum so just waiting it out is cool with me. Agree to disagree.

[HuckleB]

131. Some of us have been speaking out against the violent rhetoric of the right long before this.

A Dem in AZ was shot, after facing ugly criticism for her votes on HCR, as well as her criticism of the AZ immigration bill. She had spoken out against Palin's ugly attacks. She had shared her fears. She had just been through a campaign against an opponent who used events such as this: "Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly."

See: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/flashback-giffords-opponent-had-m16-shooting-event-help-remove-gabrielle-giffords-from-office.php for more.

Further, we were given information, and that information stands, even if you choose to ignore it.

Jared Lee Loughner: erratic, disturbed and prone to rightwing rants
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/09/jared-lee-loughner-rightwing-rants

Finally, knowing the MSM, we can also make a safe assumption that if he were on the left, they would have advertised that fact loud and clear.

Nothing is set in stone, but it makes no sense to pretend that there is no evidence to date.

[Stinky The Clown]

135. Stochastic Terrorism

[Jefferson23]

140. Drew Westen , psychologist and neuroscientist:

As a psychologist, I find it remarkable that we’re having this discussion at all, especially in light of both the weight scientists put on prediction – Gabby Giffords’ own interview at the Capitol during the election when she warned that Palin putting people like her in the crosshairs has “consequences”— and what we know about what neuroscientists call priming, the influence of a prior stimulus on a later reaction, usually unconsciously.

Do we really believe that physician George Tiller’s assassination by a radical Christian jihadist was totally random, casually unrelated to Bill O’Reilly’s constant reference to “Tiller the Killer”? The terrorist who killed Dr. Tiller had over 300 million other targets and chose this one. That should have prompted congressional hearings on incitement or perhaps even a Justice Department investigation.

Did O’Reilly kill Tiller? No. Did he explicitly or implicitly egg on the killer? Yes. It doesn’t matter that the shooter might need to be a radical religious fanatic, a technically sane but paranoid-leaning right-wing authoritarian personality (a well-studied construct), or someone who is clearly psychotic (as in Loughner’s case).
As a psychologist, I find it remarkable that we’re having this discussion at all, especially in light of both the weight scientists put on prediction – Gabby Giffords’ own interview at the Capitol during the election when she warned that Palin putting people like her in the crosshairs has “consequences”— and what we know about what neuroscientists call priming, the influence of a prior stimulus on a later reaction, usually unconsciously.

Do we really believe that physician George Tiller’s assassination by a radical Christian jihadist was totally random, casually unrelated to Bill O’Reilly’s constant reference to “Tiller the Killer”? The terrorist who killed Dr. Tiller had over 300 million other targets and chose this one. That should have prompted congressional hearings on incitement or perhaps even a Justice Department investigation.

Did O’Reilly kill Tiller? No. Did he explicitly or implicitly egg on the killer? Yes. It doesn’t matter that the shooter might need to be a radical religious fanatic, a technically sane but paranoid-leaning right-wing authoritarian personality (a well-studied construct), or someone who is clearly psychotic (as in Loughner’s case).

If you create a culture of hate, replete with people brandishing weapons at political events, as they did last summer and are permitted to do in Arizona, eventually one of the 300 million people in this country will be influenced by your words to act. Did Palin literally mean to imply with her crosshairs that someone should kill Gabby Giffords? I don’t know her mind, nor what she consciously intended (which I am sure was metaphorical, not a call to action) and what she unconsciously intended (which none of us knows).

But the entire culture of the right has become a culture of vitriol that includes the idea of using bullets if ballots fail, and it is not equivalent to Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow pointing that out and attacking that for its dangerousness — a false symmetry perpetrated by the media attempting to be “fair and balanced.”

Our political culture now countenances paranoid personalities with low IQs, poor self-restraint, and absolute conviction in their ideas — and in the evil of those who disagree with them — to “lock and load” on their way to Congress, whether as a member or as a bully with a guy outside town hall meetings. And our media no longer call them out for either being unstable or ignorant.

That is the context in which a member of Congress is now in intensive care with certain survival but uncertain quality of life. Sarah Palin is only the tip of an iceberg, and you can see fanaticism and fascism from her porch.

http://www.politico.com/arena/

[radiclib]

142. Loughner's videos are filled with ant-government paranoia

Who inflames anti-government paranoia?

[EFerrari]

143. By the same logic, bin Laden is innocent of 9/11

because there is no direct evidence that he motivated those 19 people.