Hey, there! Log in / Register
Conspiracy to NOT to mention gun control when reporting on shooting of Rep. Gifford
By AriaLittlhous on Sat, 01/08/2011 - 6:07pm
Is it more important to fill the air waves with filler about Gifford's trip to Rome or to ask how and why a man suffering from mental illness could get a gun and kill five people, including a judge? The journalists are a bunch of wimps and their editors' collective decision to not repeat the statements of gun control groups cast doubts on the editors objectivity and ability to see beyond the babble.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
The graphic Palin tried to scrub from the Internet today
Too late, Sarah.
We never imagined, it never occurred
In March, Sarah Palin posted the ad above on her facebook page and tweeted a link to it saying:
Now she, her staff and supporters are trying to distance her from the gun violence imagery.
"We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sites, Palin staffer, Rebecca Mansour told a radio talk show host Saturday. The "target list" was not intended to allude to guns.
Maybe but probably not. Even Sarah referenced it with a RELOAD exhortation. Perhaps she was thinking of surveyors mechanical pencils. Yeah, that's it. /s
If fairness, by itself in a vacuum, it isn't much. But in the context of Tea Party candidates suggesting that Tea Party members seek 2nd Amendment remedies for elections lost ...well now were talking eliminationist rhetoric.
Giffords raised concerns in March and talked about the graphic above and the threats she received: Gifford received threats over healthcare video. When the New York Post asked her father if she had enemies, he answer "Yeah, the whole Tea Party"
Sheriff Clarence Dupnik of Pima County Arizona (50 years on the job):
crazy ass shit
crazy ass shit
Read this: White Terrorism
"The lesson isn't 'there's hate speech on both sides, we need civility' - it's 'there's eliminationist speech on one side and it has to stop'" - Peter Daou
These Are Not The Violent Extremists You Are Looking For
http://bit.ly/hUbBXr
Leave it to Massacghusetts liberals
to try to score- inaccurate- political points over the tragic shooting of a Congresswoman. Have you people NO shame?
You are the same ilk who will bend over backwards to make the point that 9/11 was NOT a reflection of Islam but only the acts of a small number of violent individuals but are breathless to blame American conservatism for the act of a lone nut as in the case in Arizona (one who also- apparently- expressed admiration for The Communist Manifesto; not a tome often supported by US conservatives, tho' it does have some cred in places such as Cambridge.)
You people are truly loathsome, miling a tragedy to advance your politcal agendas. If you had conscineces they'd be bothered.
Go away,..
And don't come back until you can spell Massachusetts correctly.
Thanks!
Obviously
they hit the "g" key by mistake- it IS next to the "h" key.
And obviously you cannot abide diversity; isntead you would tell those whom you disagree with to go away. Kind of what got us inot this situation in the frist place- intolerance.
Diversity my ass
What you're talking about isn't "diversity," it's appeasement of an armed, intolerant, bullying mass of sore losers whose "Second Amendment Solution" just came down off the picket sign to kill people at a public event. Someone told you to go away, so you shoot them? "Kind of what got us inot *sic* this situation in the frist (*sic*, but I can't help but think Bill Frist must be proud) place. Telling you to take off isn't "intolerance," it's just good common sense.
Oh, and BTW
We do lump together those perpetrating Islamic violence, with those that preach it from their pulpits, trying to incite it. That is kinda the whole point after all.
There's strong evidence that suicide bombers aren't really in it for the religion, but rather use the ideology as an excuse to take out other people "justly" while taking their own life. They're sick individuals listening and using the propaganda to justify their own purposes.
Facts are, the Teabaggers and the moonbat GOP has long, and increasingly yelled about their "second amendment solutions".
Common sense people, use it.
Fire in a Crowded Theater
words have meanings
so do graphics
Where is the personal accountability you speak of?
"I hope that's not where
Also, the communist manifesto deals with the topic of organized revolution more than it does with imposing a state-controlled economy. It's actually right up the ally of someone who fancies an armed, violent revolution against an illegitimate tyrant and it's illegitimate government.
Sound familiar?
Like the constitution (or the bible), many conservatives point to it and say "See!" without ever having read it, or bothered to understand it. After all, it has communist in it's title, and we all know that communism = fascism = socialism = bad = librul. Right!? Frak Yeah!
More graphics...
(assuming UH editors have the integrity to be fair and balanced)
http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DLC-Target...
http://www.verumserum.com/?p=13647
Using the "logic" of some posters here I guess the DNC is also responsible for inducing such a climate of violence- indeed, is also repsonsible for yesterday's tragedy.
That's all right, turds- don't let your bitter politics affect your sense of fairness.
i can't see those graphics,
i can't see those graphics, they are loading slowly, but if they are DNC-endorsed maps using a metaphor of violence, of "targeting", "shooting", "reloading", "exercising the cartridge box" or the other retarded chest thumping we've seen en masse at Tea Party events, then yes, the DNC is also partly responsible.
But for true parity please also try to find us examples of Nancy Pelosi hiring camera crews to follow her to a rifle range, or Dems using "M16 shootings" as a campaign tool.
Neither can I. And let's
Neither can I.
And let's not make a false dichotomy here. There have been Democrats that have done so, and they should be damned too.
But the far right, and their leaders regularly spew this kind of vitriol as a matter of policy, and as a way to get their base excited.
A few random Dem's doing so does not equal the wrongness of the GOP using as campaigning 101.
I went to the measly Tea Party event last spring in front of government center, and Several of the 35 or so people there had questionable signs calling for revolution, calling our president sub human or illegitimate, and calling for second amendment solutions.
People have a right to say anything they want. They also have a responsibility to use their better judgment and conduct themselves with pride and honor in politics and everyday life.
It's referring to this graphic from 2004
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253055&ka...
There has been criticism of Palin's graphic since it went up. I also don't recall any reference to guns from either party in 2004, not to mention the political climate has changed from 7 years ago.
"Don't Retreat -- Reload"
...wasn't a DNC talking point. Neither was the idea that certain Congressional decisions required a "Second Amendment" response, or the misappropriated "blood of tyrants" rants so popular at the Tea Party rallies.
Regardless of what motivated Jared Loughner, the veiled and explicit calls to political violence in this country have been coming from one side of the aisle, fella, and it hasn't been the left.
In fairness...
Those are archery bulls-eyes. If arrows were found lodged in the doors -- or skulls -- of district court judges and members of Congress at the time, then, yes, there's complete equivalence. But, then again, I don't remember talk of "requivering," progressive archery meetups or the skies turning black with arrows when GOP members of Congress went out into public.
DHS links it to right wing group.
DHS put out an internal memo - published by Fox - that says the following:
Caution needs to be taken not to jump to conclusions, but DHS seems to have found a possible link to a fringe right wing group. They of course don't represent the mainstream GOP, but the point is that this type of rhetoric that the GOP uses attracts these nutjobs, and gives them something to feed off of.
The GOP really need to take a good look at itself and what it's pushing. It's well known that white supremacy groups, militias, and the remanance of the KKK have for years been trying to mute their worse rhetoric and recruit members through other means by weaseling their way into legitimate politics under the cloak of this crap the GOP spews. Making this kind of hate speech mainstream, and part of the body politic, is really just opening up doors for them.