Summary: A (liberal) victim of the shooting in Tuscon was arrested and involuntarily admitting to a mental hospital after making death threats to a member of the Tea Party. This victim, who calls himself J. Eric Fuller, blames the shooting on Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin (as well as the Tea Party), even though there is no evidence that Jared Lee Loughner ever took any interest in the Tea Party, Mr. Beck or Mrs. Palin, in fact, the evidence points to the contrary that Loughner had no interest in politics at all. Mr. Fuller clearly has listened to and been influenced by the heated rhetoric of the left, including the President and leaders of the Democratic party, who have incorrectly cast blame on the right in an attempt to gain political points. What the left is doing is creating a dangerous environment by lying to the American people about the motives and associations of Jared Loughner, and all to further their political agenda. But I fear that the left has lied to their supports so much, and created such anger amongst them that there will be an attempt on Mrs. Palin, Mr. Beck or a member of the Tea Party in the short future all because the left is lying about the motivations of Loughner for their own sick and twisted gain. Those of you on the left should take a hard look at what your progressive friends are doing. They want division, they want animosity, they want riots and chaos in the streets, because that is how they are going to secure their power. It's all straight out of Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals.
Luckily, they were able to spot this nutcase before he could do any harm. Too bad no one did the same with Jared Loughner.
This is gonna get ugly, but the victim probably shouldn't have been admitted. The victim is going through a very stressful time and I'm sure they weren't actually going to do anything. Hopefully no one tries to exact revenge on anyone because that will make the whole country look bad, not just one party.
You're making no attempts to fix your major problem. I'd say that you're going downhill, but clearly, you've strapped rockets to your back so you can free-fall faster.
I can already tell that nothing but good things are going to come out of this thread. "
Just playing by the same rules as the Progressives. "
Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
I'm not criticizing anyone. The victim is a liberal, that's a fact. I don't see how anyone could take offense to that or how that would cause any animosity within this thread.
But is said fact relevant? Given the subject matter, and the way you're throwing around words like "liberal" and "progressive", you're obviously trying to create some type of negative association with them. Stop this shallow, immature ploy. Just stop.
" @Mr_Pips: But is said fact relevant? Given the subject matter, and the way you're throwing around words like "liberal" and "progressive", you're obviously trying to create some type of negative association with them. Stop this shallow, immature ploy. Just stop. "
Pretty much what I was going to say. Any chance you had for a real conversation evaporated when you went out of your way to say he was "liberal." This is coming from a registered Republican.
" @Mr_Pips: But is said fact relevant? Given the subject matter, and the way you're throwing around words like "liberal" and "progressive", you're obviously trying to create some type of negative association with them. Stop this shallow, immature ploy. Just stop. "
It is very relevant considering this man was blaming the shooting on the Tea Party and conservative talk radio both of which the assailant had no connection to. So yes, it is relevant to point out the political ideology of this man since his actions are based on lies coming from his own side.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory?
Do you know what relevant means? What about strawman? Ad hominem? Are these words significant to you in any way, or did you have to look some of these up previously?
I can already tell that nothing but good things are going to come out of this thread. "
Just playing by the same rules as the Progressives. "
Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
I'm not criticizing anyone. The victim is a liberal, that's a fact. I don't see how anyone could take offense to that or how that would cause any animosity within this thread. "
I'm not saying it was because of his race. I'm just saying the suspect IS black and radios WERE stolen.
" @Mr_Pips: Do you know what relevant means? What about strawman? Ad hominem? Are these words significant to you in any way, or did you have to look some of these up previously? "
I know exactly what it means, and you're beginning to prove my point.
What point would that be? I'm getting a very "liberals suck" vibe from you, so I'm guessing it's that. If you're making that point, you're not making it very efficiently, since nothing you're saying has been very relevant to the original case, and your argument is "well, they're doing it, so it's OK for me to do it." It's not.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory? "
First. I flagged your post. Second, The Tea Party and Palin and that pusillanimous clown Beck have all been trying to drum up a 'revolution' against the Obama regime in the media for a while now. It's stupid and mindless, yes and people who are even minded and reasonably intelligent will ignore such calls to arms but there are some people who are crazy and not so intelligent too and they are being riled up by these theatrics. You're part of the problem by the way.
Those of you on the left should take a hard look at what your progressive friends are doing. They want division, they want animosity, they want riots and chaos in the streets, because that is how they are going to secure their power."
to @Mr_Pips said:
Just playing by the same rules as the Progressives. "
" @Mr_Pips: What point would that be? I'm getting a very "liberals suck" vibe from you, so I'm guessing it's that. If you're making that point, you're not making it very efficiently, since nothing you're saying has been very relevant to the original case, and your argument is "well, they're doing it, so it's OK for me to do it." It's not. "
No, my point is that certain people, like yourself, only look at labels. By merely putting a label on this victim I was able to create a strong reaction from you. In the same way people on the left use labels to create strong reactions within their base. When the shooting first happened, before the dead bodies were even cold, the left set out to label the shooter at a right wing nutjob who was influenced by conservative talk and conservative movements. Without any facts to back their claim up they were able to rile their base and start causing people, such as the man in the story, to act aggressively toward the target the left set. It is a tactic the left uses. They have used it on bankers, CEOs, Oil Companies, comentators, anyone that they can in order to further their politcal agenda. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory? "
First. I flagged your post. Second, The Tea Party and Palin and that pusillanimous clown Beck have all been trying to drum up a 'revolution' against the Obama regime in the media for a while now. It's stupid and mindless, yes and people who are even minded and reasonably intelligent will ignore such calls to arms but there are some people who are crazy and not so intelligent too and they are being riled up by these theatrics. You're part of the problem by the way. "
Again, zero proof that anything Palin, Beck or the Tea Party have said, done or are doing contributed in any way to this shooting. Loughner had been stalking Giffords since 2007 which predates the Tea Party and Obama.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory? "
First. I flagged your post. Second, The Tea Party and Palin and that pusillanimous clown Beck have all been trying to drum up a 'revolution' against the Obama regime in the media for a while now. It's stupid and mindless, yes and people who are even minded and reasonably intelligent will ignore such calls to arms but there are some people who are crazy and not so intelligent too and they are being riled up by these theatrics. You're part of the problem by the way. "
Beck isn't calling for a "revolution," he is just pushing people to be more politically active. Political activism is good and it is pretty much the general consensus that the shooter wasn't following the orders of Beck and Palin.
You know, I could point out all the things I absolutely hate about your post, but two things are preventing me from doing this. First, I'd feel redundant, since I'd be saying the same things I've been saying time and time again (you're a hypocrite, this is a shallow ploy that is in now way relevant, you know almost as much about logic as I do about the writings of Wayne Johnston). Second, everything about this has angered me so much that I don't think I could make a level-headed response.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory? "
First. I flagged your post. Second, The Tea Party and Palin and that pusillanimous clown Beck have all been trying to drum up a 'revolution' against the Obama regime in the media for a while now. It's stupid and mindless, yes and people who are even minded and reasonably intelligent will ignore such calls to arms but there are some people who are crazy and not so intelligent too and they are being riled up by these theatrics. You're part of the problem by the way. "
Beck isn't calling for a "revolution," he is just pushing people to be more politically active. Political activism is good and it is pretty much the general consensus that the shooter wasn't following the orders of Beck and Palin. "
Beck isn't doing anything of the sort. He uses chalkboard lectures to make leaps of logic to incite hysteria.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory? "
What the fuck does the word "the left" even mean, you're assuming some kind of unified group that doesn't really exist.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory? "
First. I flagged your post. Second, The Tea Party and Palin and that pusillanimous clown Beck have all been trying to drum up a 'revolution' against the Obama regime in the media for a while now. It's stupid and mindless, yes and people who are even minded and reasonably intelligent will ignore such calls to arms but there are some people who are crazy and not so intelligent too and they are being riled up by these theatrics. You're part of the problem by the way. "
Beck isn't calling for a "revolution," he is just pushing people to be more politically active. Political activism is good and it is pretty much the general consensus that the shooter wasn't following the orders of Beck and Palin. "
Beck isn't doing anything of the sort. He uses chalkboard lectures to make leaps of logic to incite hysteria. "
The only reason I would relate Glenn Beck and the Tuscon shooter is that they're both batshit crazy. I know little more than that.
No, that does not make it relevant, at all. We do not need to know that the guy was a Democrat to know that he was making death threats.
@Skytylz said:
" Don't fan the flames!!!!! You're lowering yourself to the level of the people you are trying to criticize. "
Again, exactly. Just because they did it doesn't mean you can. The only purpose this serves is to create a negative association with the party. "
Then why is the left blaming "rhetoric" for the shooting? Would it also not be relevant since the facts don't support that theory? Would you also chide Olberman, the President, Pelosi, Clyburn, Durbin, Shultz, Hartman and the rest of the left for constantly and systematically pushing that irrelevant theory? "
First. I flagged your post. Second, The Tea Party and Palin and that pusillanimous clown Beck have all been trying to drum up a 'revolution' against the Obama regime in the media for a while now. It's stupid and mindless, yes and people who are even minded and reasonably intelligent will ignore such calls to arms but there are some people who are crazy and not so intelligent too and they are being riled up by these theatrics. You're part of the problem by the way. "
Beck isn't calling for a "revolution," he is just pushing people to be more politically active. Political activism is good and it is pretty much the general consensus that the shooter wasn't following the orders of Beck and Palin. "
Beck isn't doing anything of the sort. He uses chalkboard lectures to make leaps of logic to incite hysteria. "
I wouldn't call it hysteria. He does do some fear mongering, but he just wants people to to be active and not sit back.
Edit: By the way, I don't really like him. He makes conservatives look bad and is kind of extreme.
" @Mr_Pips: Do you know what relevant means? What about strawman? Ad hominem? Are these words significant to you in any way, or did you have to look some of these up previously? "
I know exactly what it means, and you're beginning to prove my point. "
Yeah! He has google too!
And seriously, was this thread necessary? It's a pretty obvious troll attempt.
" Yeah! He has google too! And seriously, was this thread necessary? It's a pretty obvious troll attempt. "
Actually, I'm enough of a logic nerd to know what those mean without Google or Wikipedia, which explains why this guy pisses me off so much. Also, yes, he's a troll. I agree with you in everything except the Google part, is what I'm saying :P.
@Mr_Pips: If you didn't put liberal in parentheses, you could have had as much as three - hell, maybe even four good comments before things got sour. Even better, just omit the word since you said the victim "had no interest in politics at all."
I agree with restraining a person who makes threats or shows signs of instability. Victim or not, they're still capable of harm to themselves or others.
" As a Kiwi with no interest in politics, all this "Left vs Right" shit seems so completely nuts to me. "
I lived in New Zealand during your 2006 (I think) elections, it was the Labor party vs. National party (as usual). You definitely had the same debates as us Americans, but it wasn't as bat-shit crazy. Helen Clark won, is that ugly chick still your Prime Minister?
" As a Kiwi with no interest in politics, all this "Left vs Right" shit seems so completely nuts to me. "
I lived in New Zealand during your 2006 (I think) elections, it was the Labor party vs. National party (as usual). You definitely had the same debates as us Americans, but it wasn't as bat-shit crazy. Helen Clark won, is that ugly chick still your Prime Minister? "
Log in to comment