House of Reps. member Giffords shot in Arizona today

My entire point is that when you spend all day shouting START FIRES! EMERGENCY!!! ARMAGGEDON!! START FIRES!, and then someone starts a fire, and everyone turns and looks at you, you ought to not be surprised.

You ought to not act shocked and hurt that people are looking to you, whether it was directly because of you or not.

But that's what the right-wing is doing here. Acting as if the attention they are now getting is ridiculous. It is not ridiculous.

Why is it not ridiculous? The deaths have no demonstrated connection to the right wing speech that you would like to make the events about. That was the point of the "shitty" article, and it's a point you can't refute.

None of this is to excuse the climate of hatred that has built up in the United States over our politics and our politicians. Its origins go back a long time, but it has undeniably grown worse in recent years -- during the George W. Bush years, when the left was intensely alienated, and now during the Obama years, when the right has become vitriolic.

During the 2008 campaign, many of us in the "commentariat," including me, openly worried that occasional calls for violence at Palin rallies would lead to bloodshed. To his credit, Sen. John McCain eventually stepped in and called a halt. Since Obama's inauguration, there have been many signs that threats to public officials have been rising.

All of this should be the subject of renewed "soul-searching", as Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik called for in the midst of the carnage.

<snip>


And now we have Gabrielle Giffords, apparently the first female member of Congress who has been shot, courageously fighting for her life. Six others are dead. This is not a moment to point fingers and make accusations. But it is a time to pray for the victims -- and to pledge to each other that we will struggle for a more civil and decent America.

snood wrote:

Just so I'm clear... (and leaving aside the debate about the present tragedy)
Do you believe there to be generally equal amounts of incendiary and provocative speech coming from both right and left?

No, I am not one who believes a perfect balance exists in nature and am not interested in seeking it, like you imply.

I just think it hasn't been shown to have anything at all to do with this tragedy and think that jumping to that conclusion is itself the divisive partisanship that it criticizes.

What little we know really seems to point to a madman, one who could just have easily used the Catcher in the Rye as the inspiration. I wouldn't be lynching Salinger either.

Weather has an effect on people too, lots of things do. But there is an ideological selection bias in effect here.

Why is it not ridiculous? The deaths have no demonstrated connection to the right wing speech that you would like to make the events about. That was the point of the "shitty" article, and it's a point you can't refute.

The right is perfectly willing to paint with a wide brush and play guilt-by-association games. It's only fair they get some of their own back.

It's interesting to me that Palin seems to be mentioned more in this thread then the poor victims.

I think you clearly infer something here that I do not imply - "I am not one who believes a perfect balance exists in nature" has nothing to do with what I asked you. I was very specific.

You obfuscate - maybe its because you know that you're being an apologist for the inexcusable.

All I asked you was (and I specifically said 'leaving the present tragedy aside' for the moment) whether you thought equal amounts of bile emanate from the right and left.

Cyclops has stated the obvious truth that you seek to evade and hang with red herrings - the rightwing noise machine has fed the fires of hate and given red meat to the weak minded at an exponentially higher rate than has the left.

That you seem to deny or minimize that fact only diminishes you and your opinions.

He said he heard another 15 to 20 rounds.

Don't be silly, I am not "evading" anything. It just has no demonstrable connection to this event, if you can dispute this do so.

most gun owners never aim at or shoot at anything but inanimate objects.

Ms. Giffords had detractors on both sides of the political spectrum. Kos put a bullseye on her back in 2008 because he was angry over her FISA vote. The post is still up (June 25, 2008, I believe), but the graphic was taken down.

I think it's human nature to want to lash out and place blame when we (humans) are hurting. But, I also think Sozobe is right (Robert, too) that we need to have more facts in front of us in order to figure this out. The kid could have been on acid for all we know.

I do agree with you on the political rhetoric, in general, though. Both sides need to tone it down.

So now correlation is causation.

Funny how you get to use that however you like.