Obama's speech at the Tuscon Memorial

[elucidator]

And I suppose you’ll say that Gabby opening her eyes after the Presidential visit was just a coincidence?

[Magiver]

@elucidator

And I suppose you’ll say that Gabby opening her eyes after the Presidential visit was just a coincidence?

You’re mis-informed, she practically got up and walked after his visit. He has a 2nd career when he leaves office.

[Boyo_Jim]

@Magiver

because it doesn’t fit the criteria of a crisis. We are not under attack, there is no conspiracy or destabilization underway. There is no problem to solve.

Yes, we were under attack. An attempted assassination of an elected official, and that’s what it clearly was, is an attack on democracy itself – even though it was not part of some larger conspiracy or attempted coup.

@Magiver

Again, where is the crisis? What function as national speaker did the President fulfill? We did not need any fears set aside or hope renewed. It was a random act of violence. At what point on the something-bad-happened scale does the President address the nation?

It was absolutely not a “random act of violence”. Congresswoman Giffords was specifically targeted, if the press reports are correct about the material found in the guy’s home.

[Boyo_Jim]

For those interested in the rarity of attempted political assassinations, though the US seems to have more than most other countries they are still fairly rare. I found this site which states:

Nine American Presidents - Andrew Jackson in 1835, Abraham Lincoln in 1865, James Garfield in 1881, William McKinley in 1901 Harry S. Truman in 1950, John F. Kennedy in 1963, Richard Nixon in 1974, Gerald Ford twice in 1975, and Ronald Reagan in 1981 - have been the targets of assassination. Attempts have also been made on the lives of one President-elect (Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933) and three Presidential candidates (Theodore Roosevelt in 1912, Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, and George Wallace in 1972). In addition, eight governors, seven U.S. Senators, nine U.S. Congressmen, eleven mayors, 17 state legislators, and eleven judges have been violently attacked.

Presumably this doesn’t include last week’s attack.

[Galileo]

Your quote is from the article Letter from America: Political Assassination in the Asian Tribune on February 21, 2010. Here is the entire paragraph:

When it comes to political assassination, the record of other religions has not been any better. In modern times, we have plenty of such examples from Abraham Lincoln to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi to Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike to Yitzhak Rabin. Nine American Presidents - Andrew Jackson in 1835, Abraham Lincoln in 1865, James Garfield in 1881, William McKinley in 1901 Harry S. Truman in 1950, John F. Kennedy in 1963, Richard Nixon in 1974, Gerald Ford twice in 1975, and Ronald Reagan in 1981 - have been the targets of assassination. In addition, eight governors, seven U.S. Senators, nine U.S. Congressmen, eleven mayors, 17 state legislators, and eleven judges have been violently attacked. No other country with a population of over 50 million has had as high a number of political assassinations or attempted assassinations.

Also, from the same article:

What motivates political assassins? The answer will depend on the culture of the people where they reside. For example, in a country like the USA where firearms are readily available, most assassins were disgruntled or mentally deranged individuals who suffered from a paranoid or schizophrenic style of thinking, and only a small number of assassination attempts have been motivated by ideology; only in two cases the assassination plot was part of an organized conspiracy. Even in these instances, there was no plan to seize control of the government or alter government policies - the traditional goals of a political conspiracy.

However, in countries where firearms are not readily available, bulk of the political assassinations has ideological reasons behind why they happen, and even succeed. Some elements within the society, often a small minority, don’t like the direction in which the state is heading when the organized few within such disgruntled groups conspire to assassinate the very symbol of leadership. Their justification for the crime remains the same, echoed some six decades ago by Nathuram Godse, “There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book…”

[Shodan]

@Magiver

The tragedy in Tuscon lacks a national reason for him to attend. It’s as simple as that. It did not warrant his appearance as President. He has no association with any of the dead and their murders were not something his speech addressed. Yes, as has been pointed out, he would know the Congresswoman but she did not die nor was her attack part of a conspiracy. There is no issue for the country to come together on.

True, but Congress is a national body. And a cute little kid was killed. Maybe he would have done the same thing if they all had been in a bus crash. Although probably not, since it would not have gotten the same amount of publicity.

This is more a ceremonial rite than anything else - the President as High Priest of Solemn Occasions. Six months from now, no one outside the family will remember the kid’s name or anything about the speech.

This is one of the things that Presidents do. Even, in a way, it does bring us together, especially when Obama handles as he did.

Contrast that with the speakers at the Paul Wellstone funeral, and you see how this kind of occasion can blow up in your face if you try to take political advantage. But Obama is not that tone-deaf.

Heck, it got him a nice little bump in the polls. He may need it once Congress gets warmed up.

Regards,
Shodan

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

When Shodan thinks Obama did something right, the argument’s pretty much over.

[Boyo_Jim]

Even Glen Beck praised Obama’s speech. They showed a brief clip of him on some other program.

[Magiver]

@Boyo_Jim

Yes, we were under attack. An attempted assassination of an elected official, and that’s what it clearly was, is an attack on democracy itself – even though it was not part of some larger conspiracy or attempted coup.

It was absolutely not a “random act of violence”. Congresswoman Giffords was specifically targeted, if the press reports are correct about the material found in the guy’s home.

Even the president admitted there was nothing driving the attack. It was a crazy person. He could have fixated on the cute girl at the laundry mat or the neighbor’s dog who told him Satan wants to have his babies.

[Boyo_Jim]

There was a crazy person driving the attack. And nevertheless, it WAS an attack, as the president’s statement clearly says. Most of the attacks on public officials have been perpetrated by crazy people. They are still attacks.

[Magiver]

@Shodan

True, but Congress is a national body. And a cute little kid was killed. Maybe he would have done the same thing if they all had been in a bus crash. Although probably not, since it would not have gotten the same amount of publicity.

This is more a ceremonial rite than anything else - the President as High Priest of Solemn Occasions. Six months from now, no one outside the family will remember the kid’s name or anything about the speech.

This is my point. Would he have done this if it was a bus accident and is it appropriate. At what point does the President not make a road trip for every tear-jerker now that he’s done this? What’s the criteria? If a sports team dies in a plane crash does that count? Do you see where I’m going with this? If he stuck to a Capital appearance then it’s a kind word for a co-worker and a nod to those who were killed.

@Shodan

This is one of the things that Presidents do. Even, in a way, it does bring us together, especially when Obama handles as he did.

Contrast that with the speakers at the Paul Wellstone funeral, and you see how this kind of occasion can blow up in your face if you try to take political advantage. But Obama is not that tone-deaf.

Heck, it got him a nice little bump in the polls. He may need it once Congress gets warmed up.

Regards,
Shodan

I’m not seeing the “bring us together” part. We were never apart. Everybody is pulling for the survivors and sad for the losses. None of that changes with the speech which would have done just as well in DC. Even more-so without the applause. Imagine a famous Churchhill speech with applause added in. Now imagine the President’s speech without applause. It would stand out.

[Magiver]

@Boyo_Jim

Even Glen Beck praised Obama’s speech. They showed a brief clip of him on some other program.

I don’t know anybody who didn’t like the speech.

@Boyo_Jim

There was a crazy person driving the attack. And nevertheless, it WAS an attack, as the president’s statement clearly says. Most of the attacks on public officials have been perpetrated by crazy people. They are still attacks.

And the person attacked is alive. A cute little girl died in the crossfire of a crazy man. Does the next cute little girl who dies in the crossfire of a drug dealer turf war get an AF1 delivered speech? She’ll certainly get a neighborhood gathering of people in grief just like in Tuscon. People will lay flowers and notes of support for the families. A member of Congress may even bring it up in session.

I think it was a good speech that should have been delivered in the Capital.

[Marley23]

I don’t think this is really worth fighting about, but again, Magiver, a Congresswoman survived by sheer luck, and six people were murdered, one of them a federal judge and another a member of the Congresswoman’s staff. Whether it’s a crisis or not is up to your interpretation, I guess, but it’s certainly drawn national attention and debate and the government is involved.

[Shodan]

@Magiver

This is my point. Would he have done this if it was a bus accident and is it appropriate. At what point does the President not make a road trip for every tear-jerker now that he’s done this? What’s the criteria? If a sports team dies in a plane crash does that count? Do you see where I’m going with this? If he stuck to a Capital appearance then it’s a kind word for a co-worker and a nod to those who were killed.

Frankly, no, I doubt he would have done this for a bus accident. The criterion, as I said, is publicity.

And I don’t hold it against him. I don’t think his motives are cynical. Having a Congressperson get shot, and other innocent people get killed, and a cute little kid get killed, makes this a big news event. So the President shows up and says some nice things and we all brush away a tear and then (apart from the families) get on with our lives.

It doesn’t do any harm, although it doesn’t do much good either. I am not saying this to condemn anyone - I have no doubt that Reagan or another President I liked would do exactly the same thing (although Reagan would have delivered a better speech with fewer rainbows and kittens and shit).

I’m not seeing the “bring us together” part. We were never apart. Everybody is pulling for the survivors and sad for the losses. None of that changes with the speech which would have done just as well in DC.

I was thinking of all the fingerpointing at Sarah Palin and her websites and all that stuff that the Dems have been pitching for the last few days. Maybe I have been on the SDMB too much, but to BHO’s credit he didn’t do any of that at all - just the opposite, and good for him.

But I do think it is emotionally appropriate for Obama to show up at the funeral to give the speech. Going to someone’s funeral is a gesture of respect for that person and her family, even in private life, and for the President to take time out of his busy schedule to attend is a nice gesture.

If you are saying that there is no major crisis facing the country as a result of the shootings, I certainly agree with you. But it is a nice gesture of Obama anyway.

Regards,
Shodan

[Magiver]

@Marley23

I don’t think this is really worth fighting about, but again, Magiver, a Congresswoman survived by sheer luck, and six people were murdered, one of them a federal judge and another a member of the Congresswoman’s staff. Whether it’s a crisis or not is up to your interpretation, I guess, but it’s certainly drawn national attention and debate and the government is involved.

I see your point and I wish people wouldn’t look at this as a fight. I’m not condemning the President to a penalty box. I honestly think it would have been a better speech in DC and I don’t want the Chief of Everbody running from funeral to funeral. He’s not an F-16 flyover.

The fact is that she (as a political target) DID survive and it wasn’t a political assassination attempt beyond the fact that crazy guy picked her over some other fixation. If it was agent-x that shot her and she died then as a nation we need to hear reassurance and support from the President.

We didn’t need reassurance or support. I don’t see the reasoning behind the trip and without some protocol I can foresee fallout from the next community memorial that gets a rejection letter from the White House. He’s the commander in chief and not a funeral MC.

[Pashnish_Ewing]

@Magiver

…and it wasn’t a political assassination attempt beyond the fact that crazy guy picked her over some other fixation.

So, this guy was unlike all those other sane folk that have attempted assasinations in the past.

[Pashnish_Ewing]

Did anyone else think it was strange for Obama to bring up putting your hand over your heart when you sing the national anthem? Isn’t there a somewhat famous picture of Obama not putting his hand over his heart during the anthem that got the right wing media in a tizzy? And I thought at the time Obama said that he never thought it a requirement for the national anthem like it is for the Pledge of Allegiance (which was my understanding as well).

[xenophon41]

@Pashnish_Ewing

Did anyone else think it was strange for Obama to bring up putting your hand over your heart when you sing the national anthem?

He was quoting a comment from a photo book which had contained pictures of children born on 9/11/01.

Here’s the relevant part of the President’s remarks:

As has already been mentioned, Christina was given to us on September 11th, 2001, one of 50 babies born that day to be pictured in a book called “Faces of Hope.” On either side of her photo in that book were simple wishes for a child’s life. “I hope you help those in need,” read one. “I hope you know all the words to the National Anthem and sing it with your hand over your heart." (Applause.) "I hope you jump in rain puddles.”

I didn’t think it was strange to mention that, as it fit into his theme of unity and hope.

[Magiver]

@Pashnish_Ewing

So, this guy was unlike all those other sane folk that have attempted assasinations in the past.

No, but it’s different than a conspiracy to bring someone down for a political reason. Again, she did not die. We just lost a wonderful sheriff to a crazy person. It was a massive funeral. She was not the first person to die because of a crazy person in my area. I’m sure people would have loved to have the President visit the community in support of a public official. It would be a wonderful gesture but I would not want him to come. Had her death reached a national consciousness it would be nice to hear him mention her in a speech. From the private stories I heard she was something special.

[Least_Original_User_Name_Ever]

@Gyrate

Comments left by others are not necessarily indicative of the views of the website. They are however indicative of the views of the posters themselves. It would be wrong to say that FoxNews was responsible for comments left by its readers. It would not be wrong to say that “people are saying nasty things in the Comments section of the Fox website”. (It would be even less wrong to say “Never read the comments section of any website - 99% of the comments will be idiotic”.)

There are representatives that, to get the feeling of the real pulse of their community, they instruct their staff to pay attention to the comments after news article.