How to deflect the argument that the left jumped to conclusions in AZ.

[progressivebydesign]

I rarely create posts, but I am compelled to share this POV, in light of the accusations that the "left" was vindictive, irresponsible, or hate-mongering, by assuming that the Tuscon shooting was politically motivated, and for calling out the hate-merchants.

As I watched the moving speech by our President, I reflected on whether I was guilty of jumping to conclusions or unfairly wanting to cast blame on the vitriol from the right, that has dominated our political landscape for the past several years. Yes, I was right there with most of you, decrying Palin's gun sight maps, and her "don't retreat, reload" comments, and the myriad of violent images and words that she and those like her have made public.

I realized that because it was WIDELY known that Rep. Giffords had been the target of numerous death threats over the health care vote, vandalism and other crimes against her offices, and had someone show up with a gun to one of her events in the past, OF COURSE any reasonable person would decry the violent political rhetoric when the shooting occurred. It's not as if she, or other members of the Democratic Party, haven't been threatened repeatedly, or been one arrest warrant away from being harmed or killed. This did not happen in a vacuum.

A man was just arrested in California for making extremely detailed death threats against Rep. McDermott in California. Had McDermott become a victim of an attack, the first place we would look for answers, would be the very people that make those death threats. Rep. Giffords received numerous death threats from the right wingers, from the people that listen to Palin and others that ratchet up the paranoia. Perhaps in this case it was not someone motivated by those people... but what of the others that are stopped before they attack?

Had people like Palin, Angle,Beck, et al, NOT specialized in the language of threats and violence, there would not be a massive focus on them when something like this happens. They would be no more suspect than any other public figure. They created their own reality and now they think that they are the victims in this. They're not. They are trying to deflect the reason why they became the focus of the debate so that people will forget that the words and images are out there, and people of paranoid, unstable, or angry, minds will use them as they will.

[mmonk]

1. Yes, they did create the focus on themselves and have nowhere

else to look or blame.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

2. The police do have many 'persons of interest' and discuss things with many...

... before ruling them out or digging deeper and finally prosecuting.

I never said (I HOPE) that Sarah Palin WAS THE CAUSE OF THIS.. period.. end of story.

I HOPE I only had her as a very strong PERSON OF INTEREST in the public discourse during this trying period.

[Jefferson23]

3. You'd have to be blind not to see the connections or willfully so.

CNN has already done a bang up job declaring the left should tone it down. James Carvel gave Palin a pass too and threw in one for
talk radio as well.

I guess for some they will wait for the next death toll where the evidence is so direct with attached videos and websites joining
themselves at the hip with these clowns before we have a more serious and honest conversation about responsibility.

[HuckleB]

11. +1

[Jamastiene]

53. For me, it would take more than blindness to make me not see it.

I still cannot un-see Oklahoma City. I cannot un-see all the violence I've seen from the right wing before.

That's just it. It would take a seriously deluded person NOT to see the reality. There is a distinct pattern to their violence and their violent rhetoric. They go hand in hand. Look back when Rush Limbaugh first started on the radio and look at the escalation of violence. Look at how the last few years, everywhere you look there are threats of gun violence AS campaign rallies. Everywhere you look and listen, there are right wingers brandishing guns in inappropriate places, making threats of violence, and committing it. It's time people woke up to reality.

I just can't pretend I don't see what is right there, plain as day. I don't see how anybody can ignore it. I just do get this whole idea of rolling over and taking this shit from them when we are right.

[Jefferson23]

55. Yes, I agree, we can't afford as a nation to ignore this behavior any longer

[RainDog]

4. after seeing people carrying guns to town hall meetings...

I was surprised that no one was shot then, frankly.

And, extrapolating from that - the reason those people were there is because they had been brought together by Dick Armey, Fox News and Republican fundraisers.

While I do want to scale back the rhetoric myself - my own - and would hope others would find some higher ground too - I think, in the the current political climate, with a 400% increase in death threats against the president since a Democrat took office - it's not unreasonable to assume such violence would come from someone on the right.

And, with that, I'm ready to try to move on.

However, I doubt that I will see that same resolve from those who get paid a lot of money to continue to stir up hatred. And that still remains a problem. They don't want us to be able to resolve problems because then they would be out of their jobs.

[Maine_Nurse]

9. Umm...

"the reason those people were there is because they had been brought together by Dick Armey, Fox News and Republican fundraiser"

Huh? Maine is a predominantly Democratic state. And we have one of the highest per capita rates of firearms ownership in the country. A very large portion of us Democrats here carry firearms. That's the way it is. I really doubt that we do it because of some wing nut.

[RainDog]

13. so democrats were at tea bagger rallies?

if you read what I wrote, I was specifically talking about the HCR tea bagger rallies, not people with guns in general.

or, rather, I wasn't clear when I talked about town hall rallies. I was talking about the people with signs and guns who protested against HCR

[Maine_Nurse]

Ok, I think

What you posted was people with guns at town hall meetings. Nothing about rallies or Tea Parties. I'm in rural Maine. We have town meetings to decide things (and yeah, a fair number of people are armed). That is what I thought you were referring to. I apologize.

[Jamastiene]

79. Why do you need a gun at a town hall meeting? n/t

[Maine_Nurse]

81. I carry most everywhere...

except inside my hospital and the homes of hospice patients where I volunteer. Obviously there are a couple other places like courthouses, etc where it is prohibited by law. I used to carry relatively large sums of cash for my employer when I worked on the road making spot purchases of used heavy equipment before becoming a nurse, so it was a practical issue. It just becomes habit eventually just like putting on a belt.

I also have a bullet scar in my right side from a street robbery attempt (not related to my former job, just some scumbag). I wasn't working, so I wasn't carrying. The creep wasn't even trying to shoot me, he just prodded me in the side with the weapon and must have had his finger on the trigger. He freaked out worse than I did when it went off. All I had were bare hands and ended up fracturing a bone in one of them. I got very lucky that the bullet missed the kidney. That will never happen again.

Also, there are some misconceptions amongst prescription drug abusers that are a concern in my field. Maine is the per-capita capital of opiate addicted babies and per-capita #2 in people in treatment for opiate addictions so it stands to reason we are pretty high up on the list of rates of addiction itself. Criminals think that hospice personnel carry opiates with them. This is generally not true except that when a patient first comes on board, they are provided by their nurse with an "emergency pack" of small quantities of certain meds, including morphine, to get them by in a crisis until a pharmacy can deliver a real prescription when things change suddenly. When you live in a town of 800, everyone knows who the docs and nurses in town are and it is a concern.

[jvanm]

62. Loughner was hardly apolitcal, attending Giffords 2007 event and

carrying around a copy of the Constitution to wave in true Tea Partyesque fashion.

from WP:

Police: Black bag found that could contain Tucson shooting evidence
. . . .
On Sept. 29, 2010, Loughner entered the Rio Nuevo One Stop center to see a job consultant. He was carrying a video recorder and taking pictures, according to the complaint report filed by Mary Brodesky. After being asked more than once to turn the recorder off, Loughner put it in his pocket, but left it on, she wrote.

"I asked him to turn it off. He refused," Brodesky wrote. "He pulled a crumpled copy of the Constitution out of his pocket and waived it at me, saying it was his right. I attempted to calm him down but eventually had to ask him to leave the building." . . . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/13/AR2011011303515.html?hpid=topnews

[WilliamPitt]

5. I can help, if I may

http://www.truth-out.org/the-wrath-fools-an-open-letter-to-far-right66686

http://www.truth-out.org/poor-poor-sarah66781

[Maine_Nurse]

6. Yeah, but...

In this instance, the left is as full of BS as the right. Both sides are absolutely overflowing with it. Common sense (and common decency) has ceased to exist. We all need to realize that bad people exist and bad things happen. We all need to stop making ridiculous accusations and pointing fingers before any facts are presented. Both sides absolutely make me want to vomit.

[spanone]

8. couldn't disagree more. n/t

[Maine_Nurse]

14. couldn't care less

6 people were killed, including a young child. And all the left and right can do is turn it into some form of political warfare full of false accusations. Both sides are trying to capitalize on a tragedy. We and they are no better than some large predatory corporation. All everyone seems concerned with is making the other side look bad.

[emilyg]

25. Thank you.

[HuckleB]

31. Wrong.

Wrong.

[Maine_Nurse]

36. Wrong?

Please explain.

[HuckleB]

47. I've done that repeatedly.

[Pedalpower]

61. I'll try...

I can understand that some would like us to focus only on the lives of the victims of this crime, but if we do only that, we don't ever get to the root of the problem. Listen, I used to be a Rush listener, for many years, believing everything he said. Then, on one issue, because I did some checking, i found out that he lies and that they lie. Now I get facts and facts lead me elsewhere, so...

Ever since Obama's candidacy, the tone of the Right's argument has changed. They have steadily moved away from talking about specific issues and facts, instead choosing to talk about overarching themes of patriotism and loyalty. They began painting Democrats as enemies of America. They refer to Liberalism as a virus. On each issue, they don't talk of minor sacrifice if the Democrats get their way (which is really all one side faces when there's compromise on legislation), but instead talk about a loss of our 'American way of life'. They say that Democrats will take everything away from you, the REAL Americans.

They have painted a doomsday scenario, with an anti-American force trying to destroy everything good, from within. Heck, they even suggest that Obama is a secret Muslim Kenyan. SO, in the face of certain destruction, what is a loyal Conservative to do?!

Well, if they believe what is told to them, and they feel a need to act, they may just be influenced by all of the gun-related rhetoric that the Conservatives have been using. If you haven't noticed, guns and Defense are big themes on the Right. There have been suggestions that gun use can solve our current 'crisis'. Palin put a gun sight symbol over Giffords' district on her website. She has also told her followers to not retreat, but to 'reload'.

Here's what I know: desperate people will take desperate actions, and the Conservatives are actively working to create a sense of despair. I blame the shooter AND those who have created this violent tone in America.

[Catherina]

39. Thank you. n/t

[Mimosa]

65. ^ I agree, Maine_Nurse ^

Welcome to D.U. :)

On another thread here I posted the following:

"One doesn't have to be right wing to be repulsed by the idea of slogan bearing T-shirts draped over chairs at a memorial service. People who know me on D.U. usually classify me as one of the more liberal among us.


USA is #1 at being tacky! For heaven's sake who thought of 'branding' and exploiting a memorial event? Who came up with the slogan 'Together We Thrive' in the faces of people mourning their recently slain loved ones? I know if one of my loved ones was killed or wounded I'd be angry at the damn T shirts.

"Together We Thrive" indeed. What does that mean in relation to a horrible, violent massacre?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seriously, that slogan makes no sense at all in the context of a horrible, violent tragedy which took the lives of 6 people and wounded 14. The senseless act of violence will make us all feel less safe in public places.

As far as I can discern this was the act of a mad man who had an altar with a fake skull and candles in a tent in his backyard. Doesn't sound political to me.

[mmonk]

10. I've never tried to run someone off the highway because of their

bumper sticker or found someone's number who wrote in the newspaper to call and threaten them. Both have happened to me. I have to call you out on that one.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

71. "If you see a Subaru with an Obama bumper sticker, stop the driver"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8CYThB_EtY

Good comment: "Someone needs to put an Obama bumpersticker over her mouth."

If I remember correctly, Saint Sarah eventually walked back that suggestion, in a weasly non-apology sort of way.

[HuckleB]

12. Thanks for the pure BS.

:wow:

[DirkGently]

15. Only one side is bringing guns to rallies & talking about "2d Amendment remedies."

The right's been ratcheting up its demonization of government and "liberals" for years. Only their crazies assassinate doctors. Shoot up churches. Prowl government bases looking for "FEMA death camps." Cackle about throwing bricks through the windows of anyone supporting healthcare reform. Play apocalyptic war-games in the woods, preparing to fight "the Feds."

Sorry, but there is no equality here. NONE.

[Maine_Nurse]

18. I agree with some of that

But lots of people carry firearms to many events (though usually concealed). I have carried to Democratic events in the area and I know plenty of others that do also.

[Jefferson23]

17. 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/

[HuckleB]

32. +1

[Jamastiene]

78. Very well stated.

Of course, Palin didn't do the shooting, but her violent graphic and Giffords own prophetic message about that violent graphic prove that this vitriol and violence from the right is having an effect on a certain subset of the population, to disastrous consequences.

[Le Taz Hot]

45. Rhetoric has consequences.

Talking about "Second Amendment solutions" and literally targeting, as in gun crosshairs targeting 20 U.S. Congresspersons and one of them just HAPPENS to get shot. How about, "Don't retreat, reload."

Another example. Anti-choice groups saying, "We don't condone violence but THEY'RE KILLING BABIES!!!!!!!!" and kapow, another doctor who performs abortion services is shot in the back and killed.

24/7 hate rhetoric has consequences and if we don't speak up against hate rhetoric, we're just as guilty as the haters are. Namby pamby fence-sitters make ME want to vomit.

[lfairban]

60. We are forgetting our manors.

Welcome to DU, Maine_Nurse. :applause:

I would like to say that a voice of moderation would be met here with a reasonable response. Unfortunately, some of the replies have demonstrated the validity of your statement by the nature of their dispute.

I don't really believe the left is as bad as the right, but the left is much worse than I would hope. For almost two days there was basically nothing on the "Greatest" page except Palin and/or Arizona threads, and little content to justify it. It got so bad I quit reading for a while.

[spanone]

7. the language of the right has been in the spotlight for some time

people's fears are well documented

this didn't come out of the blue

[begin_within]

16. He pointed his gun at a politician. Therefore it was politically motivated.

[Maine_Nurse]

19. Except that it wasn't

You don't let facts get in your way any more that some of the right wing twits do.

[begin_within]

20. Except that it was

You don't let the truth get in your way any more that some of the right wing twits do.

[Maine_Nurse]

23. wow

Double post. Sorry.

[Maine_Nurse]

24. Wow

He is a mentally disturbed individual that had a personal gripe against the poor woman because he felt that she ignored him and possibly because she didn't back Nancy Pelosi on some matter. Nothing actually political about that.

Have you ever worked in a psych hospital? Because that is what I do. I deal with persons suffering from disorganized or paranoid schizophreniform disorders every day. I have literally seen people that truly believe a bird outside the window is sending them messages to kill or that the desk is really a brain wave emitter (not really sure what that is).

[kwolf68]

26. Interesting

You say it's NOT political then you say he had a gripe because 'she didn't back Nancy Pelosi'?

[Maine_Nurse]

29. Ok, sort of

But if you read some of his stuff or documentation about him, that also goes more toward the personal gripe thing than real politics or political stance. He was angry the way a 5 year old gets if he can't have an ice cream. If he'd ever been able to ask his unintelligible questions to Pelosi, he probably would have hated her too.

[HuckleB]

33. If you read the most current stuff about him, he was a right wing extremist.

But we can just forget about that, right?

:rofl:

[kwolf68]

34. hard to tell

I think he was certainly not to the left. Nowhere in his screed was he complaining we didn't have universal healthcare, he said nothing about out of control wars for profit, took no position on gay rights, abortion or the environment.

He prattled about language, logic, literacy and the gold standard. Right wing? I suppose so...but I can't recall a single righty I've debated complaining about these exact things.

[Catherina]

41. He was very unhappy with the wars. Friends said he hated Bush for them.

which could be another thing he held against Gifford.


On July 7, 2010, Loughner posted his assertion that the war(s) in Iraq and Afghanistan “is a war crime from the Geneva Convention articles of 1949”:

There was help with cleaning the uranium from the Iran and Iraq war in the 1980’s?

Article 33 of the Geneva Convention is the prohibit of pillage.

All military invasions with armed forces into a foreign country are war crimes in the Geneva Convention articles of 1949.

The Iraq and Afghanistan war of 2010 is a military invasion with armed forces into a foreign country.

Therefore, Iraq and Afghanistan war of 2010 is a war crime from the Geneva Convention articles of 1949.

Ouch! For the thoughts of war.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread590759/pg3#pid9166104

[HuckleB]

48. He went on about things that only a couple of RW dufuses spread online.

That's the part of the equation that people choose to ignore. His most recent obsessions are clearly extreme right wing in source.

[socialist_n_TN]

76. Not that hard to tell. That Mother Jones piece..........

pretty much laid it out. He was a follower of the libertarian subset of "sovereign citizens". That's DEFINITELY on the far right.

[Maine_Nurse]

37. Doubtful

I actually doubt he had the mental capacity, in the way we know it, to be left or right. I work in a psych hospital catering to chronic, severe mental illness. Usually the patients are in an severe acute phase due to stopping their medications and are committed to us by the courts. Until you have spent lots of time with these poor people, I honestly don't think you can comprehend just how convoluted their thinking is or how intricate their delusions can be. The command hallucinations are very real to these people and they are tortured by them. Understand that inanimate objects often talk to these people and order them to do things. Most people would be shocked and scared to realize just how large a part of the population has a psychotic disorder.

[Catherina]

42. Thanks for weighing in Maine_Nurse. I appreciate your contributions.

I have family members who worked at Spring Grove State Hospital where they treated people with acute psychiatric disorders. It used to be known as Maryland Hospital for the Insane but the name was changed to be more politically correct. Yours are the firsts posts I've read here that show real understanding of how severely mentally unbalanced people reason. I really appreciate your online contributions and real life work. Thank you for both.

[HuckleB]

58. Unfortunately, they show very little understanding of the true complexity of mental health issues.

Her oversimplified rants are as off base as it comes for those of us who work with people dealing with the full spectrum of mental health issues, in terms of intensity and the ebb and flow of their illness.

[Maine_Nurse]

59. Well...

You are correct that I deal with a pretty narrow subset of people with mental health issues-- people suffering from severe acute-phases of severe chronic illnesses that have been deemed by a court of law to be a danger to self or others (usually repeated consecutive findings at that). That is a very very small percentage of people with mental health distress. And yes, mental health disorders are extremely complex and usually multi-factorial, not a single disorder in isolation.

On the other hand, although I have not seen any formal evaluation report or diagnosis of the shooter, his actions leading up to the incident (for years) and the incident itself are pretty aberrant. Even giving you that the first shot went into a political figure, he then pumped 4 rounds into a 9 year-old child, killed another 5 people, and wounded another 19. There is no "rational" reason for doing so. As distasteful as it may be, at least there is some "logic" to a hired killer, crime of passion, or murder to protect ones self during the commission of another crime. Indiscriminately killing random people after years of threatening behavior is probably not Seasonal Affective Disorder.

While it is certainly possible for a person with a non-psychosis-based mental illness to experience an event of such distress that psychosis does temporarily manifest itself, the history of setting up a shrine, the writings, the irrational hatred and distrust of both political spectrums does tend to suggest that if this person is mentally ill, it has been a growing chronic problem and not an isolated psychotic incident secondary to an acute exacerbation of a mild non-psychotic disorder.

ADDED: It is important to note that not all mental/behavioral issues are really "mental illnesses". I would fully expect that someone has run some brain imaging on this person to rule out tumors or other neurological issues. Same for a full metabolic panel and some other testing for physiological ailments.

[HuckleB]

69. And now you show that you're making assumptions you cannot make.

That is ludicrous. Period.

[HuckleB]

49. Then you have no idea what you're talking about.

I've worked in mental health for 20 years. You are so far off base it's not even funny.

[Maine_Nurse]

56. Really??

"I've worked in mental health for 20 years. You are so far off base it's not even funny."

Well I'm not sure what kind of "mental health" sub-field you work in, but I work in an inpatient state psychiatric facility. The kind of place that takes the patients that the regular psych hospitals cannot and will not deal with. We are very pro-patient rights and "least restrictive" means something here (mostly because these facilities were basically torture chambers until the early 70's), yet our average stay is around 4-6 months with about 20% staying a year or two. We also have clients that have been inpat with us for 10+ years because there is simply no alternative. We usually have about 80% severe schizophreniform disorders, 15% severe mania, a few percent of truly disturbing personality disorders, and a handful of structural brain damage (auto accident, etc). Nearly all are court committed, many with court ordered meds/treatment. Most have been through every type of treatment there is and are down to dangerous third-line atypical anti-psychotics with pretty horrible side effects. Some don't even respond to those.

Our last "armed standoff with police" patient early this winter could be a clone of this shooter. Shrines, rambling disjointed manifestos, violent fantasies, etc. In looking back at his past, we saw growing problems starting in late high school that just kept getting worse, yet nothing that would have triggered any response anywhere except possibly from friends/family (which are often driven away by the patient) that might have known his issues were more severe than just hating school and being a social misfit. And just like this one, both left and right were targeted in some way, either with documented thoughts of violence or rambling incomprehensible written tirades. We all just got lucky that our future assasin got into a fight with his girlfriend first and she called police.The Tucson shooter is nowhere near as rare as people would like to think. Society is just lucky that most of them make mistakes along the way that trigger some sort of intervention prior to a catastrophic incident. There are around 4 million people in the US suffering from schizophrenia itself, with many others suffering from related schizophreniform disorders. Most are not dangerous or violent in any way, and, once effective treatment has been identified, you'd be hard pressed to pick these people out of even your closest friends if you didn't know their history. But there are those where the diseases are so severe that nothing we have yet discovered gives meaningful help.

These types of patients self-generate their ideas after fixating on nearly anything, even inanimate objects. I've seen patients convinced that people with a certain eye color were evil and after him, to the point of spontaneous violent acts. Many of these patients are quite intelligent and self-aware and could even tell you that they know the voices in their head are not real, but that they can only fight them so long before getting exhausted and giving in to their instructions. Not all the command hallucinations are "bad" either, we've had many that have donated their entire financial worth to animal shelters and such to the point of becoming homeless and starving. Many live in fear every second of every day, yet in their "down" phases, they are so filled with remorse and self-loathing that they may become actively suicidal and want to protect the world from themselves.

[HuckleB]

57. In other words, you think you can generalize from a very minute portion of the mh population.

This is why your posts are so out of whack with reality.

[Jamastiene]

80. My ex-boss' mother-in-law once said I was evil because I have brown eyes.

Her reasons were political. She insisted that I had too much "black" in me and that was the reason I have the brown eyes. She said I would be all the things that she thought black people were (the typical stereotypes about murder, theft, trouble-making).

It was a weird thing to have someone say. I don't attribute her saying that to any form of mental illness. It was part of her politics. She never STFU about how evil the Democrats, the gays, the blacks, and the Jews were in her mind. It was all part of her political beliefs, not some mental illness.

So, in some cases, the belief that people with a certain eye color are evil, has absolutely nothing to do with mental illness. It is directly linked to right wing eugenics beliefs and the school of thought that Jewish, Native American(another group of people my ex-boss' mother-in-law railed against incessantly) and black people are somehow inferior or evil.

So, your mention of eye color and mentally ill hallucinations really struck me, because sometimes people think people with certain eye colors are evil, not because of mental illness, but because of political reasons. That's the whole point of this conversation. Not all of Loughner's postings and writings were, for a fact, based on some mental illness. Some were very much political in nature. If you truly want to discourse to be better on this, they you should at least acknowledge that some of his postings and writings could very well have been political in nature. His obsession with Giffords and the fact that he shot her sort of lead one to believe that it was political. I don't know how you can miss that.

[Crystal Clarity]

67. Yeah I caught that too

:eyes: Go back to AMG

[Maine_Nurse]

68. Confused?

AMG??

[HuckleB]

70. Well...

...interestingly, this new poster from Maine has spent his/her first 20 posts trying to argue that there is no possibility that Loughner had any political motivation for the attack.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[Maine_Nurse]

72. You caught me...

I'm actually Rush. I lost 200 lbs, earned a BSN, and just finished shoveling 14" of snow so I could fool you. Drat, caught again.

[HuckleB]

74. If the shoe fits...

[kwolf68]

21. It absolutely WAS a political attack

I do agree that the impetus may not have been adherence to a specific ideology, but he tried to kill a representative in the US House. Whether he did it because she was too moderate, too conservative, too Liberal or he just didn't like the way she talked, he tried to kill a congressperson, which makes it political AT LEAST on some level.

What confuses me is shooting up all the other people. It's doubtful he knew any of them, but chose to kill them anyway.

We can strap a tin foil hat on and say that he is 'throwing the dogs off his tracks' by targeting collateral damage and putting a bunch of left-wing books on his myspace (with right wing) to in the least confuse people who are trying to figure out his agenda.

Honestly I don’t know what made this guy tick, but I am fairly certain that he didn’t see Palin’s website and decide to start shooting.

So I won’t blame the right ‘for the shootings’…but the shootings underlie a real problem with the right and their blatantly violent discourse. Liberal hunting permits, 2nd amendment solutions, etc….the freaking day Obama was elected they were marching on Washington.

At least Democrats waited until Bush fucked up (invaded Iraq) to march and in fact the Pretzledent had a 90% approval rating prior. If Obama could walk on water and cure cancer he’d still have 25% who hated him and a good many of them who would love to kill him. There is no doubt in my mind of that.

[Maine_Nurse]

27. I'll grant you that...

Yeah, he shot a politician so it has political impact I suppose. And I do not disagree that there are a lot of the right that probably need meds as bad or worse than some of my patients (although there are plenty of the left that probably do too, just for different types of reasons).

But this guy is just plain unbalanced somehow. Aside from the fact that I can't diagnose, I haven't met and interviewed the person, but his behaviors, the timing of onset, and progressively worsening signs do imply a specific type of illness. IF that is the case, a raindrop could have urged him to kill. Really. And from some of his writings, it looks like he never intended to survive. Sometimes people can't just commit suicide themselves no matter how much they want to die. So they find what, to their warped thinking, is an acceptable way to get someone else to kill them. As for why he shot others, he might have gotten into a type of frenzy (4 shots to a 9-year old plays to that a bit) or he just wanted to keep doing something horrible until someone killed him.

By the way, thank you for being reasonable and providing explanation. Much appreciated.

[kwolf68]

28. No problem

I certainly agree with you that he has mental issues. If he had just wanted to kill Giffords he'd have done that and that alone.

When you go assassinate you kill who you came for. Whoever killed Kenndey killed him and that was that. They didn't shoot up the people in the streets.

Again, I really doubt there is any credibility that this guy was an active Tea Party person. While his rantings are mostly right-leaning claptrap, I just can't fathom a guy pissed off about the Gold standard using that as reason to go kill people.

His agenda, unlike McVeigh's, was probably more personal in nature.

However, the rhetoric from the right is out of control. The family of Giffords even alluded to it, without placing blame. Yes, this guy is probably guided by non-political forces, but the next nutjob MAY BE guided by politics and we can't have people getting shot simply because of their viewpoints (left or right).

[Maine_Nurse]

35. Absolutely

"However, the rhetoric from the right is out of control. The family of Giffords even alluded to it, without placing blame. Yes, this guy is probably guided by non-political forces, but the next nutjob MAY BE guided by politics and we can't have people getting shot simply because of their viewpoints (left or right)."

I more think of them like the extremist Repubs/Right than that average Joe Repub. But I do agree with you. And the right seems to have way more of the extremists than we do (although we do have our own extremists and even violent terrorists and criminals as well). I'm sure most of us would disavow the violent and/or criminal left groups and I'd like to hope that your average everyday Republican would do the same with their versions. I just wish the non-criminal extremists would shut up. I walked into a place with Rush on the radio the other day and thought my head was going to explode. I definitely has some very un-nurse-like thoughts.

[kwolf68]

38. Not all Conservative are turd-burglers

The left has our share of people who embarrass us.

I am an avid environmentalist so when a bunch of Hummer vehicles (which I do hate) are vandalized my first thought is, 'ohhh no."

I didn't give a shit about the cars, but rather it would make people like me look like dopes.

We have other far-left groups who say and do some kooky things and they say usually go unnoticed until Limpballs or Insanity uses their quotes to paint all us Liberals as kooky.

So the ridiculous rhetoric DOES exist on the left, but it's typically NOT violent in nature and is hidden in dark enclaves and is certainly not given out for public consumption, mainly because mainstream Dems disavow it.

[Catherina]

43. Well said (though I disagree about right-leaning claptrap).

I spent a long time reading everything I could find that he'd written and what friends and acquaintances said about him. I don't see anything right-leaning or left-leaning about him, just a very confused, unbalanced and hurt person who absolutely mistrusted the government.

[Catherina]

40. A therefore B? That was Jared Loughner's way of reasoning.

"If A.D. is ending then the year is finite.
The year is not finite.
Therefore, A.D. is not ending.

If the year is finite then the calender is at limit in years.
The calendar is not at a limit in years.
Therefore, The year is not finite. "

Jared Loughner.

[Mr Generic Other]

22. and palin was also calling for the "un-american", julian assange

to be taken out as recently as november 30th.
she thought he should be "hunted down like al-qaeda".
she's like the queen of hearts proclaiming, "off with their heads".


http://www.newser.com/story/106447/sarah-palin-julian-assange-should-be-hunted-like-al-qaeda-leaders.html

[upi402]

30. She needs to look at herself and make some serious amends

But she'll burn in hell before her ego allows that.

[SoCalDem]

44. horses..not zebras

Horses or Zebras? Phone a Friend? Poll the Audience?
Posted by SoCalDem in General Discussion
Mon Jan 10th 2011, 07:56 AM
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/SoCalDem/213

As hard as the media is trying to spin this, millions of people just cannot be totally "wrong".

Years ago a doctor told me about something he was taught in medical school.. He was told to remember that when you hear hoof-beats, it's probably horses..not zebras (unless you are in Africa). It was the professor's way of telling these young med students to trust their instincts and to look for the obvious FIRST...rule it in or out, and then go looking for zebras.

And on Who Wants to Be as Millionaire, the knowledge of the group was usually right on the money. Phone a friend made you hope your friend was smarter than you, but the combined wisdom of the group was better.

Also on Jeopardy, usually the first thing that pops into your head is the right answer (or question, in the case of Jeopardy)

We (the public) are smarter than the average bear (a toss to us oldies) and within milliseconds of hearing about the shootings, we immediately had teabag/republican venom on our minds...followed by the ever-right-friendly press' depiction of their violence-inducing tactics, as "funny, silly, exciting, grassrootsy, etc")..

We are now being dragged kicking & screaming on a search for zebras & aardvarks & capybaras & lemurs..

It's horses...

[One_Life_To_Give]

46. So did right after Fort Hood

In part it's human nature to try and quickly understand/react. Although we are also a nation of laws where each party should get the benefit of Due Process as well. Most of the time I expect DU'ers to be above making summary judgments and indicting who;e groups based upon potential links which are yet to be in evidence. But that doesn't mean it's not Human to react as we have to this.

[Iggo]

50. By admitting it.

People jump to conclusions all the time. Right conclusions. Wrong conclusions.

The way to deflect it is to say "Yeah, we did. And here's why..."

[Jamastiene]

51. Our concerns are not without reason.

Numerous death threats and close calls happen to Democratic politicians way more than Republican politicians. Just look back to the propaganda the Nazis used repetitively for years. That stuff really does brainwash a certain subset of society, those who may be vulnerable to that sort of thing.

Personally, I'm not the least bit interested in laying down and taking it...not this time. This violence has been relentlessly coming from the right wing for ages now. I don't see how anybody who lived through the 90s cannot see the parallels...right down to Timothy McVeigh being pulled over the morning he bombed Oklahoma City, then let go with a warning, and so was this guy, pulled over the morning he attacked, and let go with a warning. Remember Eric Rudolph? He was sheltered by churches as he fled from the FBI for ages. He was helped by people who agreed with him bombing the Olympics, a gay bar, and a women's clinic, killing a security guard and maiming a nurse.

This right wing bullying and violence is relentless and it has been happening for decades now. It would take a full fledged lobotomy for me to pretend I didn't see the pattern of right wing violence. It just keeps escalating. I just can't bow down and pretend I don't see the danger of their 24/7/365 spewing of hatred. It would take two lobotomies for me NOT to see it for what it is; reality. That is just too much to ask. I can't pretend I don't see what is right in front of our faces. No pretty speech is going to change reality. No media campaign to save Palin/Beck/Limbaugh/FoxNews face is going to change the reality. Period.

[socialist_n_TN]

52. I deflect it by telling those folks to ...............

get back to me when a RW politician is the victim of an assassination attempt.

[raccoon]

54. Wish I could rec your post! NT

[Mimosa]

66. You mean like Gerald Ford or Ronald Reagan?

It will happen. This country is infested with nuts and psychos.

[socialist_n_TN]

75. A couple of things................

Can't you come up with anything later than almost 30 years old or, in the case of Ford, almost 40? Also weren't those people (Fromme and Hinkley) also considered "random nuts"? But you do have a small point. So I'll stipulate, get back to me when a RW politician is the victim of an assassination attempt IN THE LAST 30 YEARS OR SO.

[lfairban]

77. You excluded Sara Jane Moore

"Sara Jane Moore: "The government had declared war on the left. Nixon's appointment of Ford as vice president and his resignation making Ford president seemed to be a continuing assault on America.""

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local&id=4900159

Oh, darn. That was over 30 years ago, wasn't it. I guess you have a point.

[femrap]

63. Great post....

Surely palin, beck, etc. realize how difficult people are having it lately. When the economy tanks, violence increases. To me, this tragedy was just a matter of time.

Their hate speech adds fuel to the fire. This time it appears a young man suffering from schizophrenia acted. Next time, an angry white dude who has had a few drinks? Another white angry guy who hasn't worked for over a year?

This is NOT the time to add fuel to the fire. Someone should hit Murdoch w/ a civil suit.

[GoCubsGo]

64. After the litany of examples of violence and threats you mentioned...

...and after all of the ones mentioned in the rest of this thread, I don't see how anyone could jump to any other conclusion. Especially considering it was a politician that got shot. You are exactly right. The light is shining on the cockroaches, and they want us to turn it off, so they don't have to crawl back into their hideyholes.

[fascisthunter]

73. Exactly.... it's bogus in my Opinion