How America’s elite hijacked a massacre to take revenge on Sarah Palin

By Tom Leonard
Last updated at 12:39 PM on 11th January 2011
Whether they should really have to do so is another matter. The reality is that there is as yet no evidence that the political Right, and the Tea Party in particular, has — as its opponents say — ‘blood on its hands’ over the Tucson murders.
While some liberals have slyly implied that Loughner was a Tea Party supporter, former classmates remember him as being ‘Left-wing’ and ‘liberal’.
Another said he was ‘on his own planet’, which seems nearer the mark. No existing political organisation – including the Tea Party – comes close to championing Lough-ner’s deranged world view.
Paranoid and nihilistic (he kept a miniature altar with a replica human skull in his backyard), he had clearly surfed the wilder shores of political views on the internet, preaching about the evils of religion, and even picking up and espousing a theory that the government was using grammar as a form of mind control.
History shows how dangerous it is to try to second-guess the motives of political assassins.
John Hinckley shot Ronald Reagan because he was obsessed with the actress Jodie Foster, not because he hated Right-wingers.
Likewise, Lynette Fromme tried to shoot Gerald Ford because she revered the cult killer Charles Manson.
But those lessons from history won’t stop some Democrats exploiting the shooting of a nine-year-old girl and five others at the weekend with precisely the sort of foam-flecked over-reaction for which they love to condemn their opponents on the Right

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1345952/Arizona-shooting-Americas-elite-hijacked-massacre-revenge-Sarah-Palin.html#ixzz1AjbbVnvx

The LIES are not working. LOL

January 11, 2011 7:08 AM
Poll: Most Americans Feel Rhetoric, Tucson Shooting Unrelated

CBS News Poll analysis by the CBS News Polling Unit: Sarah Dutton, Jennifer De Pinto, Fred Backus and Anthony Salvanto.
Nearly six in 10 Americans say the country’s heated political rhetoric is not to blame for the Tucson shooting rampage that left six dead and critically wounded U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, according to a CBS News poll.
In the wake of the shooting, much focus has been put on the harsh tone of politics in Washington and around the country, particularly after a contentious midterm election. Rhetoric and imagery from both Republicans and Democrats have included gun-related metaphors, but the majority of the country isn’t connecting the shooting to politics.
Overall, 57 percent of respondents said the harsh political tone had nothing to do with the shooting, compared to 32 percent who felt it did. Republicans were more likely to feel the two were unrelated – 69 percent said rhetoric was not to blame; 19 percent said it played a part. Democrats were more split on the issue – 49 percent saw no connection; 42 percent said there was.
Independents more closely reflected the overall breakdown – 56 percent said rhetoric had nothing to do with the attack; 33 percent felt it did.

gordonbloyershow said:

How America’s elite hijacked a massacre to take revenge on Sarah Palin

I’m sorry for the tragic coincidence between Palin’s map which was political, and the Tuscon shooting. I’m also dam tired of her playing the victim and pundits from either side trying to claim the moral high ground for their side.

thank you Steven and Jon for being the voice of sanity in a media frenzy.

gordonbloyershow said:
How America’s elite hijacked a massacre to take revenge on Sarah Palin

When are you going to realize that no one is listening to you? Especially now, when people who spew the vile garbage that you do are being seen for what you all really are, a terrible plague on our society. Play defense all you want, but no one’s actually taking the time to read through the novels of nonsense you post.

jjay7381 said:
When are you going to realize that no one is listening to you? Especially now, when people who spew the vile garbage that you do are being seen for what you all really are, a terrible plague on our society. Play defense all you want, but no one’s actually taking the time to read through the novels of nonsense you post.

Which is to say you’re not reading things that don’t agree with your predetermined opinion, right?

You blame those whom you blame, and evidence (or lack ther of) doesn’t really matter. Am I right?

Colbert said “we may never know what motivated this clearly unbalanced individual, but we do know that now is not the time to lay blame or politicize this tragedy.”

Umm, when is the time to politicize this tragedy? I guess if we keep watching you, we’ll know?

Bill Maher clearly disagrees with this line of reasoning. As does nearly the entire lineup of MSNBC and most of the liberal editorial writers in the country. So who really speaks for the left on this? If we’re going by numbers, Stewart and Colbert would seem to be in the minority among liberals in the media, most of whom were penning their “Tea Party Shooter” articles a few minutes after the news of the shooting broke.

Criticizing Fox and MSNBC is easy. We’ll see how much the rest of the media celebrates Stewart and Colbert now that they aren’t in total agreement with them. (Or, more likely, they’ll ignore it and wait for the next Palin-is-so-dumb joke and all will be forgiven.)

The debate is not whether THIS man was influenced by sarah palin but whether hate talk influences us. The right says No anything they say or do has no effect on anyone’s thinking or actions.( that is why they bother to say it) They think that the constitution gives them the right to urge killing of their opponents through the use of symbols and rhetoric.( words like reload, symbols like scope cross hairs) They have spent countless hours telling us and anyone who will listen just how innocent they are. Why? because they know full well that that it does in fact influence us otherwise why bother use that type of talk and those symbols???? Does the government believe that speech and symbols can be threatening? You bet they do! A case in point was a Louisville KY man who was arrested for publishing a poem in a on line white supremacist site urging the killing of the President and his wife called the “The Sniper”. Why? Because words and symbols do influence us! I can’t paint a swastika on a temple nor burn a cross on a black persons lawn it is considered a hate crime and I shouldn’t be able to target my enemies or opponents with the cross hairs of a high powered rifle scope and tell people just reload! It sends a message and ms palin knew what message she sent and intended it. No one with any human decency should be defending her actions if you do it sends the message that you like hate speech and intend to not only defend it but use it yourself,and the rest of us will at least know the real you.

dahlimama said:
The debate is not whether THIS man was influenced by sarah palin but whether hate talk influences us. The right says No anything they say or do has no effect on anyone’s thinking or actions.( that is why they bother to say it) They think that the constitution gives them the right to urge killing of their opponents through the use of symbols and rhetoric.( words like reload, symbols like scope cross hairs)

I agree, but it’s really not as if the left never uses that kind of language and or symbolism.
A post on another site mentioned this
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25872864/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

Adkisson, a 58-year-old truck driver on the verge of losing his food stamps, had 76 rounds with him when he entered the church and pulled a shotgun from a guitar case during a children’s performance of the musical “Annie.”

why?

“It appears that what brought him to this horrible event was his lack of being able to obtain a job, his frustration over that, and his stated hatred for the liberal movement,” Police Chief Sterling Owen said.

there are crazies on both sides but does our language have to encourage division , anger and resentment every day? As several people have pointed out, it isn’t just gun imagery that’s the issue. It’s constantly painting people we disagree with as enemies, and unamerican commies and nazis or whatever.

If ideas and images have no influence upon us, then why all the commercials on radio and tv.

Guess the advertisers can save a few dollars pushing the value of gold, beer and trucks into our heads.