World Politics

[Anonymous]

Please note that one of his favorite books is "we the living" by Ayn Rand..
Maybe Alan Greenspan and Pam Geller will go visit him on death row.

He also lists "Animal Farm," and "The Communist Manifesto." Maybe his political theory is a bit more complex than you suggest.

 

[redtreviso]

I'm sure the last thing Liz Trotta would have wanted is for someone to shoot the president the day after she said this. Especially if the shooter said he'd like to get Osama too like he heard on foxnews.. As the days go by without her and foxnews having to regret this she, foxnews and the right wing pundits celebrate their successful planting of these seeds that will inevitably bloom for them in the Tim McVeighs and Jared Loughners of the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KirvIAs_5Cw

 

[The Hitch]

He also lists "Animal Farm," and "The Communist Manifesto." Maybe his political theory is a bit more complex than you suggest.

Good point. A person of reason would take this into account before marching on with the same talking points..

But not redtrevisio. Ignore the counter evidence, accuse those who point it out it of watching fox news, and on to the next.

foxnews and the right wing pundits celebrate their successful planting of these seeds that will inevitably bloom for them in the Tim McVeighs and Jared Loughners of the world.

My guess is that redtrevisio simply has not heard of either Animal Farm or the Communist Manifesto. Afterall they have absolutely nothing to do with Fox news, Sarah Palin,Rush Limbaugh or even America.

But maybe one day Glen Beck will call for it burned, and redtrevisio- who based on this thread does nothing but watch fox news all day, will understand that no one who got even part of their opinion from fox news would read this "communist manifesto" thing (whatever that is)

Its just not their thing

 

[Cobblestones]

He seems to live in a parallel universe where he is the only one who sees reality, and the rest of us have been fooled into something he has not. This is a VERY common narrative with psychotic people, and is based in faulty brain chemistry.

I would agree with that, but this doesn't necessarily absolve people like Palin from any responsibility IMO.

Let me ask a different question: what would this guy's target have been if he had done it 40 years ago, say at the height of the Vietnam war protests? A democratic jewish female representative? Probably not. What would his target have been in, say, today's Middle East if he had grown up in, say, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, or in a new Jewish settlement on the West Bank? What if he lived in 1920s Germany?

The fact that this guy is insane is a given. Obviously, no one in their right mind would do such a thing and expect any positive reaction. But there's a second element which should not be missed. It is that this was no random target; even the insane are motivated by something. In his case, I believe he was pointed toward his target by the predominant rhetoric in today's society, which is mostly the rhetoric of violent right-wing extremism. Of course his lack of mental capacity made him unable to differentiate between words and deeds, but we, the mentally stable, do understand. So for Palin and others to hide behind an insanity defense is an insult to our intellectual capacity.

It should be obvious that even the insane are influenced by the society they live in. They might not be able to cope with what they see and hear, and they will construct their own, often utterly bizarre worldview, but they're not isolated from outside, societal influence, among others Glen Beck, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. I've seen something similar some 20 years ago in Germany where immigration was hotly debated and in particular the Turkish minority became subject of incendiary political speech. Now I use the word 'incendiary' on purpose, because it didn't take long for some Turkish businesses and homes to go up in flame. In some instances with people still in them. Several people had to die, among them a few children before the rhetoric cooled off and these horrible events ceased to happen.

No matter what, the violent rhetoric has to go away. The earlier the better.

 

[redtreviso]

Good point. A person of reason would take this into account before marching on with the same talking points..

But not redtrevisio. Ignore the counter evidence, accuse those who point it out it of watching fox news, and on to the next.



My guess is that redtrevisio simply has not heard of either Animal Farm or the Communist Manifesto. Afterall they have absolutely nothing to do with Fox news, Sarah Palin,Rush Limbaugh or even America.

But maybe one day Glen Beck will call for it burned, and redtrevisio- who based on this thread does nothing but watch fox news all day, will understand that no one who got even part of their opinion from fox news would read this "communist manifesto" thing (whatever that is)

Its just not their thing

Yea right...never mind that the right wing noise machine said 1000 times on prime time "ah ha he read the communist manifesto therefore he is a liberal" Case closed...the end., We decide what you should think. Their truth is always your truth hitch..fanboi

 

[fatandfast]

Jon Stewart is right..if you watch Fox and the some of the others no wonder nobody paid any attention to this guy..you can't tell the 200% crazy MF that will pull out a gun to the 199% crazy MFs with their own TV or radio show. The lines are blurred

 

[krebs303]

his belief that the manipulation of words brainwashed the great majority of the population, who he believes are illiterate. And by illiterate, he appears to mean that most people do not understand the meaning of words that he understands. He seems to live in a parallel universe where he is the only one who sees reality, and the rest of us have been fooled into something he has not.

Sounds very familiar.

 

[rhubroma]

I do not disagree with that in the slightest. My only point is that discussion, and the discussion of this particular incident are two distinct conversations. I am glad that there is conversation regarding the political rhetoric in the US that stems from this incident, because it is a conversation that needs to be made. I hope it can be made without resorting to denouncing caustic rhetoric with caustic rhetoric because that will not solve the problem. I see people from the right and left searching for the moral high ground in this, when what I am doing is looking at my discourse. If I am caustic and hateful (which I certainly have been) regarding the caustic and hateful rhetoric of those whom I oppose, how will that ever solve anything? I guess, being spiritually minded, I always come back to Gandhi on such things. I actually believe that confrontational pacifism is the only sane option in existence. I cannot therefore throw the anger and hatred I feel at my opposition and expect anything will change.

I understand now more of the point you are trying to make. I posted two posts that I would not have had I read this first. Maybe I need to not jump so quickly in the future.

Shameful though it is, in cases like these, both sides of the political spectrum try to make as much, or as little, of the situation as circumstances and popular opinion permits.

One side attempts to discredit the other, while the other tries to refute the accusations with often straw-man arguments and distracting neither here nor their points purly on the basis of perceived future electoral gains. To a great extent it is in the nature of opposition politics to do so, for which one side must seek to exploit any opportunity to gain ground on the rival party or faction by whatever means (where exaggeration is usually resorted to), while the other enters per force into a defiant defensive mode, even at the expense of what would otherwise seems obvious due to the drama of the moment.

While both share in the manipulation game, the critical heads are, however, called upon to get beyond this political posturing, puerile and based entiely on selfish interests as it is, to arrive at something more objective in terms of the facts and what has actually taken place.

Critical heads, if they are intellectually sincere, from the left and the right, will see in this Arizona case a politcal figure that was targeted because she came from the left and probably because Jewish, which was perpetrated by a right-wing fascist extremist. Because his motives were certainly not coming form the left, the right, at least in part, will be thus be held responsible. Also because, consciously or not, from the moment any assassin points his weapon at a politician, a political motive becomes inescapable.

In this case people from the left have a right (and perhaps a duty) to denounce those elements of the right who behave most irresponsibly, given the media power they assume, in enhancing a social and political environment that in today's America hasn't exactly be qualified by equilibrium, restraint and measured responses. To the contrary, it is more reactionary and livid than ever. At the same time those among the right need to make it clear, in no uncertain terms, that they disassociate themselves from such fascist tendencies within their movement.

The problem, as I see it, is that neither has happened. It seems, as usual, that the left looks pitifully for more reasoned interpretations so as not to seem overly prejudiced, while the right has been ever more vociferous in their denouncements of even the slightest culpabilty on its part in what is an arrogance that usually befits them. In the latter case the right knows it can rely on enough popular support (and ignorance) to get away with such obstinancy, while the left is forced to take up the usual prudent stance, thereby enfeebling itself, so as not to seem too extreme! How grotesque!

I'd be all for toning down the voices, as you say, if the ones that were doing the most shouting would shut-up. And for once I'd like to see the right denounced and be held accountable for its ways, to the same degree that the right gets away with (as if it were in the natural order of things for them to do) and with the same firm tones, everytime it finds reason to take up odds with something coming from the left it finds so "dangerous" to America.

Perhaps shouting is not the answer, though certainly those whose voices are most raised in this instance have the least right to do so IMO.

 

[Anonymous]

I am simply unconvinced that right wing rhetoric and/or antisemitism is the only road to the event. One could easily become deranged regarding the watered down "liberalism" that is the current Democratic party if one were truly on the extreme of liberalism. One could easily get to the perceived necessity of murder from an infinite number of roads, and I am just unconvinced that this guy trudged the road of right wing rhetoric. I just have not seen specific evidence other than the fact of who he killed. Maybe it is the lawyer in me, but I just don't see that as strong enough to make pronouncements regarding who he listened to (in the absence of evidence to that fact) or what who his political guides are (again, in the absence of evidence to that fact.) Would I be surprised if it were someone on the right like Palin? No. However, I see nothing that indicated he ever listened to or followed anyone but the congresswoman. It appears he could have been obsessed with her, and that can happen for a myriad of reasons.

None of that is to say that the points regarding the political rhetoric from the right presented here are wrong. I detest Palin, Bachmann, and the like because they rely on the most simplistic and ignorant of rationale to manipulate voters they know have no knowledge or understanding of the political reality in Washington. Not to mention that they and many are fundamentalist wack jobs who discredit, ba$tardize, pervert, and destroy a religious message that is clearly at odds with their gospel of wealth.

Still, I do not see heaping mounds of blame on them at this point. My mind may change as facts come to light, but from what I have read (and this has been a substantial amount-in fact, I found the shooters video on youtube barely 2 hours after the incident. Less than 300 people had viewed it at that point), there is just nothing I see as a definitive link between his insane ramblings and the political message of any political set or subset. There may be one, but if there isn't, damning people who are not at fault prior to the proof their message contributed is destructive in the long run to the message that the current political rhetoric is too heated and caustic, because it is pretty caustic to place blame for the slaughter of 6 people on the head of someone who may not have actually been a factor.

Changing the tone involves changing our individual tone, and supporting those in power who are doing the same. There are only a few from either side (maybe only having two sides is part of the problem, but that is a topic for another day) who come to mind when I think of it, but there are a few.

 

[Anonymous]

Jon Stewart is right..if you watch Fox and the some of the others no wonder nobody paid any attention to this guy..you can't tell the 200% crazy MF that will pull out a gun to the 199% crazy MFs with their own TV or radio show. The lines are blurred

I agree with his assessment on this point. That does not mean however that those 199% led him to that event.

 

[redtreviso]

""""What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He's sitting there in jail. He knows what's going on, he knows that...the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he's just a victim. He's the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America...this guy clearly understands he's getting all the attention and he understands he's got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he's not convicted of murder - but something lesser.""""

----guess

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Yea right...never mind that the right wing noise machine said 1000 times on prime time "ah ha he read the communist manifesto therefore he is a liberal" Case closed...the end., We decide what you should think. Their truth is always your truth hitch..fanboi

Not that it matters but why do you have to be condescending / attacking to other members? We understand your point and opinion. But do not want anyone else to have an opinion that is not in agreement with yours. You like to accuse everyone that has those other opinions as talk show listening, fox news watching etc.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

""""What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He's sitting there in jail. He knows what's going on, he knows that...the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he's just a victim. He's the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America...this guy clearly understands he's getting all the attention and he understands he's got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he's not convicted of murder - but something lesser.""""

----guess

No idea. But since you keep quoting the guy .... I will guess Rush Limb?

 

[Hugh Januss]

We can talk about both sides being bad, but only one puts gunsights on their political targets, only one kills doctors in the name of "Right To Live". The fact is the right incites while the left merely promises more than it delivers (and that mostly due to the machinations from the right).
If a private citizen did what Palin's crowd did they would either be in jail or have a full time FBI tail on them.

 

[Anonymous]

Of course, we can always rely on Rush to take the disgusting vitriol to the next level: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...-loughner-full-support-democrat_n_807543.html

 

[redtreviso]

Not that it matters but why do you have to be condescending / attacking to other members? We understand your point and opinion. But do not want anyone else to have an opinion that is not in agreement with yours. You like to accuse everyone that has those other opinions as talk show listening, fox news watching etc.

I'm sure hitch will say although he might not agree and doesn't pay attention but Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham's boyfriend Dinesh D'Souza says that the right wing and Sarah Palin are the true victims here..and Maggie Thatcher mumbled in agreement..

 

[Anonymous]

We can talk about both sides being bad, but only one puts gunsights on their political targets, only one kills doctors in the name of "Right To Live". The fact is the right incites while the left merely promises more than it delivers (and that mostly due to the machinations from the right).
If a private citizen did what Palin's crowd did they would either be in jail or have a full time FBI tail on them.

So, in contrast then the other side only kills the unborn in the name of "the right to choose"?

"A characteristic of many contemporary minds is susceptibility to the superstition that all behavior can be traced to some diagnosable frame of mind that is a product of promptings from the social environment. From which flows a political doctrine: Given clever social engineering, society and people can be perfected. This supposedly is the path to progress. It actually is the crux of progressivism. And it is why there is a reflex to blame conservatives first."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/10/AR2011011003685.html

Have you tried the Stone Brewing 09.09.09 yet? Just fabulous beer

 

[Hugh Januss]

Of course, we can always rely on Rush to take the disgusting vitriol to the next level: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...-loughner-full-support-democrat_n_807543.html

Oxycontinboy really just needs to go away.

 

[The Hitch]

I'm sure hitch will say although he might not agree and doesn't pay attention but Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham's boyfriend Dinesh D'Souza says that the right wing and Sarah Palin are the true victims here..and Maggie Thatcher mumbled in agreement..

So, in contrast then the other side only is the unborn in the name of "the right to choose"?

Sorry Scot. its not quite the same.

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry Scot. its not quite the same.

Point of view, Hitch.

 

[The Hitch]

Point of view, Hitch.

I too see it as a unpleasant act. But it is often neccesary ( to save women) and are you seriously comparing it to blowing up buildings or shooting rampages?

 

[Anonymous]

Thats not to say that i support abortion. I do see it as a unpleasant act. But it is often neccesary ( to save women) and are you seriously comparing it to blowing up buildings or shooting rampages?

No, I'm not. HJ made the point that the right kills abortion doctors in the name of "the right to life." I'm taking this to mean only people on the right side of the political spectrum can be capable of such behavior. He said people on the right incite where people on the left only over-promise.

My point was to suggest that HJ making a sweeping generalization about those on the right (the killing of doctors in abortion clinics is somehow ok) is not much different than someone like me making a generalization about the left (being perfectly ok with killing the unborn in the name of "the right to choose").

Neither are correct.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I'm sure hitch will say although he might not agree and doesn't pay attention but Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham's boyfriend Dinesh D'Souza says that the right wing and Sarah Palin are the true victims here..and Maggie Thatcher mumbled in agreement..

I do not understand what you posting.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Of course, we can always rely on Rush to take the disgusting vitriol to the next level: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...-loughner-full-support-democrat_n_807543.html

Thanks for posting the link TFF. I was left to the guessing game with the other forum member.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Point of view, Hitch.

And as your point of view it is fine, and it's your right to hold it. Just don't go legislating it on others.
But let's just stick with Hitch on this and say they are not quite the same, as the other is an ultimately unwinable argument.

I was in Mammoth last week and had some Mammoth Brewing Co. 395 IPA brewed with Juniper berries and sage, I found it very yummy. Haven't had the 09 09 09 yet I shall have to go on a search as soon as I finish the case of 395 I brought back from the brewery.