What’s your point?
As has already been explained to you:
-
It was a comment left by someone on the dailyKos, not a dailyKos column.
-
About the only thing that suggests the author is unstable is the capitalization of the word dead. The actual comment shows anger, but no violent intent. More like apathy, giving her the cold shoulder.
Of which there is no evidence. Correlation not implying causation and all that.
Agreed. How much angry usefulness is forgone by waiting a day or two to start blaming people?
I actually think it is quite conspiratorial and theoretical when people suggest the right is systematically inspiring wackos to assassinate democrats
It (the Kos reference) was a failed attempt at equivalency. I wanna know now, who will be fool enough to keep using gun imagery and gun references.
Look dude, we ALL know who was using it up until today. Don’t get the idea we’re too stupid to know the difference now.
Oh, I see
Even though this appeared 2 days ago, you can say with 100% certainty that this wasn’t what set this nut job off…yeah, right :rolleyes:
I blame the whacko. However, I do not have any problem with making the rhetoric tossers stop and THINK about what they say too. Are they personally responsible for every crazy asshole that comes down the pike? No. Should they stop and think about the “message” they put out? YES. Should they be arrested and prosecuted? No. Not as long as we still at least pretend there is such a thing as free speech. Should they face the risk of being fired or losing their “fan base” over it? Yes.
Yes, it was.
Now, why are you helping the Hillbuzz people in trying to mislead people into thinking that Daily KOS wrote that article?
And, why are you trying to draw yet another false equivalence between acting as if someone was no longer around and being the force that ends someone’s life violently? In other words, how do you make the leap from “being dead” to “making dead”?
Because that’s what your doing here: telling the same lies as the Hillbuzz people, and promoting the same false equivalences.
For that matter, who is Hillbuzz, and what makes their word worth a shit?
I say again, can you claim with 100% certainty that comment published by the Daily Kos two days ago wasn’t what set this nut job off
Yes, I can. Now what are you going to do, smart guy?
Well, I’m not going to say you’re dead to me, too many nut jobs around these parts…
Agreed. However, I have a problem attributing crazy gunman to crazy rhetoric. When it turns out crazy gunman was a schizo-commie, then conservative pundits will play the persecution game. If that is what is required to make politicos stfu, then no thanks.
Do your part in making partisans stfu: Chill out.
One less would be an improvement, if that’s what you’re offering…
I don’t believe anybody has suggested this, but opining that the right has been irresponsible with its rhetoric is not a conspiracy theory. Once can think that a nutjob was inspired to violence by the rhetoric without believing that such was the intention of the rhetoricians, just that it was an unintended consequence of irresponsible rhetoric.
I can, because there’s nothing in that comment that could be construed as a call to violence, unlike Sarah Palin putting gun sights on people.
I don’t like Commies either. Never have. Not a problem. As far as I’m concerned the ultra far left is just as rotten as the ultra far right.
It’s really quite simple: Why would someone voice their opinion, if not to influence others? Unless you really think that no one’s perspective is ever changed by hearing from other people, everyone bears responsibility for the effects of their words. The RW leaders repeatedly stoked the embers of hatred and fear, and they got the expected conflagration. No one is saying that they should be charged with anything–I have no idea how you came up with that–but it is quite appropriate to insist that they bear some responsibility for this and deserve public blame.
If they don’t want to be guilty, the solution is simple: stop invoking Nazi imagery in your protests, stop calling liberals socialists, stop touting gun ownership as having anything to do with the franchise, stop doggedly pursuing obvious lies like the “death panels,” stop questioning others’ patriotism. You can actually be as extreme as you want to in your views, so long as you cut the bullshit. You want minarchy or libertopia? Fine. State your case respectfully, instead of claiming that global warming is a socialist conspiracy.
People were already talking about how irresponsible the right wing’s violent rhetoric was before this happened. It just didn’t get much attention, because right wingers like it, and non right wingers mostly avoid mainstream right wing violent hate speech because it is so unpleasant.
A map with a gun sight on Gabrielle Giffords and the headline “It’s time to take a stand” is either irresponsible or intentionally inciting violence.
The “second amendment remedies” can only reasonably be read as inciting gun violence.
I have a problem with saying this type of thing is only bad if we can prove it is precisely what pushed this gunman over the edge. No, it is disgusting and irresponsible no matter what.
squink is the conspiracy theorist that comes to mind:
It’s quite conspiratorial to suggest that Palinistas are planting seeds of rhetoric in the minds of insane people, brainwashing them to commit acts they wouldn’t have. Palin is to Loughner as the Fruity Oaty Bar commercial is to River.
but, since you might be wrong that the gunman is a conservative nut, you’re handing to the pundits you hate most the persecution card.