Hudsonvalley82
Well-Known Member
Wow dude, I think you just dq'd yourself here...
Trying to make herself look better? By being right? Really?
You are just incapable of seeing things for what they are, here you are saying that all of us are trying to put a story where there isn't one and you go ahead and say that a woman who got shot, who forsaw getting shot was just posturing??
You are in possession of the worst kind of dismissive thinking imaginable.
What is going on is that there is violent talk in the air, connected or not to this violent talk is an incident who's premise is eerily parallel to the narrative of the violent talk of late.
What has to be address is the violent talk in politics. Obviously people have been talking about this in the past, we are not the first, but this event brings to light the topic of the violent political rhetoric.
Just the irony of her being targeted coupled with SarahPAC's map, again connected or not, should bring in question what place the map has in our society anyway.
Whether Jared acting or was influenced by the "anti-government" comments, publications, and broadcasts doesn't matter. What does matter is that the rhetoric DIRECTLY depicted such an event as a goal, or rational outcome, and now that it has happened, AGAIN CONNECTED TO THE COMMENTS OR NOT, we MUST address the place of such tactics and language in our law making process.
From where I am standing everyone can agree that no one wants violence in politics, no one wants dead politicians, thats pretty clear. Outside of Jared.
Now, why then would we be accepting of such rhetoric from recent memory? Politicians have to own and apologize for their statements and actions, not run from them. It's time to cowboy the fuck up and act as a responsible, and capable public figure or servant. Mrs. Palin has not, and is running from her PAC's actions as fast as she can. Being in denial is obvious and sad, if she were ha;f a politician she would repudiate her actions and the actions of her political action network. Much like progressives have done for their actions in the past with the poorly chosen metaphors (although sparse) during the bush years.
This is not an acceptable method to steer people's political beliefs any more. You can lag behind all you want and drag your feet by blaming progressives yet again for politicizing an inherently political event. Lets not forget that people don't shoot politicians for non-political reasons. You don't just up and choose to shoot a member of congress, one has to look at his motives, and I willing to bet dollar to dough-nuts that this guy was a nut ball a to z. But that doesn't vindicate all the horribly pertinent firearm related campaign theatrics from being tied to this at all.
Jared was a crazy, insane, bloodthirsty, unstable murderer.
He acted in a political way against a political figure, therefore he is an assassin.
I think that we can agree, regardless of our opinions on the incident, that the fiery, gun and violence laden political "motivation" is a REALLY FUCKING BAD IDEA, ESPECIALLY AFTER THIS EVENT!!!!
Trying to make herself look better? By being right? Really?
You are just incapable of seeing things for what they are, here you are saying that all of us are trying to put a story where there isn't one and you go ahead and say that a woman who got shot, who forsaw getting shot was just posturing??
You are in possession of the worst kind of dismissive thinking imaginable.
What is going on is that there is violent talk in the air, connected or not to this violent talk is an incident who's premise is eerily parallel to the narrative of the violent talk of late.
What has to be address is the violent talk in politics. Obviously people have been talking about this in the past, we are not the first, but this event brings to light the topic of the violent political rhetoric.
Just the irony of her being targeted coupled with SarahPAC's map, again connected or not, should bring in question what place the map has in our society anyway.
Whether Jared acting or was influenced by the "anti-government" comments, publications, and broadcasts doesn't matter. What does matter is that the rhetoric DIRECTLY depicted such an event as a goal, or rational outcome, and now that it has happened, AGAIN CONNECTED TO THE COMMENTS OR NOT, we MUST address the place of such tactics and language in our law making process.
From where I am standing everyone can agree that no one wants violence in politics, no one wants dead politicians, thats pretty clear. Outside of Jared.
Now, why then would we be accepting of such rhetoric from recent memory? Politicians have to own and apologize for their statements and actions, not run from them. It's time to cowboy the fuck up and act as a responsible, and capable public figure or servant. Mrs. Palin has not, and is running from her PAC's actions as fast as she can. Being in denial is obvious and sad, if she were ha;f a politician she would repudiate her actions and the actions of her political action network. Much like progressives have done for their actions in the past with the poorly chosen metaphors (although sparse) during the bush years.
This is not an acceptable method to steer people's political beliefs any more. You can lag behind all you want and drag your feet by blaming progressives yet again for politicizing an inherently political event. Lets not forget that people don't shoot politicians for non-political reasons. You don't just up and choose to shoot a member of congress, one has to look at his motives, and I willing to bet dollar to dough-nuts that this guy was a nut ball a to z. But that doesn't vindicate all the horribly pertinent firearm related campaign theatrics from being tied to this at all.
Jared was a crazy, insane, bloodthirsty, unstable murderer.
He acted in a political way against a political figure, therefore he is an assassin.
I think that we can agree, regardless of our opinions on the incident, that the fiery, gun and violence laden political "motivation" is a REALLY FUCKING BAD IDEA, ESPECIALLY AFTER THIS EVENT!!!!
