Gabriella Giffords Assasinated...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Something I've learned in my time with crazy (really crazy) family and friend is that you can't apply reason to try to understand what was never reasonable in the first place.

If a man will shoot the president to try to impress an actress, then this guy could certainly have shot a congresswoman for an equally insane reason. It does not matter which way he leans. What has been said by Palin and Obama are not important. He would have found a reason, even if it was because his cat was telling him to do it.

And, seriously, you guys are getting all frothed up because you think politicians need to be nicer to one another? The irony is killing me.

My favorite post in the thread. The level of paranoia about Sarah Palin, whom I am not very fond of either, is astounding. If she only had a fraction of the power attributed to her by the left, she WOULD be a force to be reckoned with. Fortunately, she doesn't.

The idea that anyone using phraseology like "in the cross hairs", "targeted", "under attack" etc. in political discourse is referring to guns or bow and arrow for that matter is beyond absurd. The terms are metaphorical and are used ubiquitously by the right and the left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Normal men love the smell of ANY attractive female. Women do too. People who smell terrible like President Obama repell other normalhuman beings and are exhibiting a lack of hygiene and lack attention to detail as well as common sense.....and everybody knows it!

Overall this thread has been distressing--but this is really funny. (Even though I feel guilty about laughing at the clearly ill...)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tell that to obama's kids. They are the ones complaining about his horrible odor.

They LIVE with him. Do you not see how that makes their opinion normal and you a creepy person with a hyGiene phobia that you have merged into a political conspiracy theory.

Thee are doctors to help you. Or tinfoil for hats is in aisle 8. Pick whichever the voices tell you to choose.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:The idea that anyone using phraseology like "in the cross hairs", "targeted", "under attack" etc. in political discourse is referring to guns or bow and arrow for that matter is beyond absurd. The terms are metaphorical and are used ubiquitously by the right and the left.

Right. When a candidate advertises an event saying, "Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly" and that event looks like this:



Only the truly paranoid would think that the phraseology had anything to do with guns.

Note: I realize that's not an M16, but the event apparently featured other weapons as well. I can link to pictures of the M16 being fired at the same event if you insist.

[Anonymous]

I think in that campain event, the word "target" is obviously a play-on with regard to the shooting range target. Millions of people enjoy shooting ranges, so not sure how that is a violent event. might as well be shooting basketballs into a net.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think in that campain event, the word "target" is obviously a play-on with regard to the shooting range target. Millions of people enjoy shooting ranges, so not sure how that is a violent event. might as well be shooting basketballs into a net.

It's not the individual word. It is the overall message that the tea party is sending. You can forgive a graphic. But the sum total of the rhetoric is creating a hostile climate. As people get more emboldened, they start to talk about violence more and more. Eventually one guy throws something through the door of a campaign office. And then three people do it. And then it goes from there.

Every parent knows that the more acceptable violent language becomes (whether on TV, in music, at home or in the school), the more kids begin to slide in subtle ways. What is true for kids is true for adults, particularly those without a firm moral foundation, or those who are under economic, medical, or emotional pressure.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I think in that campain event, the word "target" is obviously a play-on with regard to the shooting range target. Millions of people enjoy shooting ranges, so not sure how that is a violent event. might as well be shooting basketballs into a net.

A lot of politics is about symbolism. When a candidate organizes a campaign event, the symbolic value of that event is very important. As such, the symbolism of shooting guns at human-shapped targets (with names written on them) is very different from the symbolism of shooting basketballs into a net. That seems so obvious as to not require explanation. But, to put it another way, I get lots of invitations for fundraisers hosted in local restaurants. But, I've never been invited to a fundraiser at a strip club. Do you think that is because strip club owners are not politically active or because the symbolism would not be helpful to a candidate?

[Anonymous]

I think is politically bad for Obama that he smells terrible. Most politicians can make comebacks like Blagojavich, Bush etc.... but having a genetic dispostion to smell horrible makes people less likely to follow your leadership. Thats why it's important that everybody know how rank Obama smells before they make up their mind to allow them to be their leader.

[Anonymous]

Let's all please ignore the poster with the bizarre posts.

[Anonymous]

oh clearly, the campaign event was aimed at gun owners because they are a voting block on the right. no doubt about it.

but i think non-gun lovers see any association with shooting as "violent", and I can certainly see where you are coming from. but for gun enthusiasts, going to a shooting range is about as violent as going to a bowling alley. and I'm being serious here.

in any event, I don't think any of the teabaggers have incited any violence and hopefully they will not. and I think both parties have consistently used these phrases (target, etc.), and if want to move away from that then maybe that would be a good idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think is politically bad for Obama that he smells terrible. Most politicians can make comebacks like Blagojavich, Bush etc.... but having a genetic dispostion to smell horrible makes people less likely to follow your leadership. Thats why it's important that everybody know how rank Obama smells before they make up their mind to allow them to be their leader.

This makes sense to you, and that is why you are deranged.

Interesting theory that it is a genetic disposition, though. Would you care to elaborate?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in that campain event, the word "target" is obviously a play-on with regard to the shooting range target. Millions of people enjoy shooting ranges, so not sure how that is a violent event. might as well be shooting basketballs into a net.

A lot of politics is about symbolism. When a candidate organizes a campaign event, the symbolic value of that event is very important. As such, the symbolism of shooting guns at human-shapped targets (with names written on them) is very different from the symbolism of shooting basketballs into a net. That seems so obvious as to not require explanation. But, to put it another way, I get lots of invitations for fundraisers hosted in local restaurants. But, I've never been invited to a fundraiser at a strip club. Do you think that is because strip club owners are not politically active or because the symbolism would not be helpful to a candidate?

And Joe Manchin (WV) does this means? http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/10/ad-watch-joe-manchin-takes-aim-literally-at-cap-and-trade.html

Should Cap and Trade supporters get extra security as a result?

[Anonymous]

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/11/09/kanjorski-on-gov-elect-rick-sc

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=13647

http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/listen-up-lefties-the-difference-between-the-dncs-bulls-eyes-and-sarah-palins-surveyors-crosshairs/

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/14/obama-if-they-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-we-bring-a-gun/

[Anonymous]

I'm sorry. It's so hard to take those seriously when you post that ridiculous stuff about how Palin's graphics were really surveyor's crosshairs.

I wrote on another post and I'll write here, that's her "I didn't inhale" moment. Laughably unbelievable.

[Anonymous]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epdJWNA65oY&feature=youtu.be