Individuals… who just happened to coincidentaly be Democrats who just so happened to be accusing Republicans.
What do you want…evidence of a conference call between the anchors of ABCNNBCBS? Or a memo from the DNC?
That’s not very sivil of you.
Sure.
Yes. 57 percent agree conservative rhetoric didn’t cause the shooting, according to one poll.
Well, yes. I thought it was a given that if someone was blaming conservatives, the blamer would be a liberal. Saying a few Democrats have accused a few Republicans is one thing; you appeared to be saying most Democrats and most media outlets have blamed Republicans, which is not true.
Question: Did Palin inject herself into this tragedy or was she injected into it?
I could add a few links related to her accusers but I’ve learned that it isn’t worth the effort.
Could you please ask what you’re asking? What the heck does “[inject] into this tragedy” mean?
She injected herself, unwittingly, by putting a target over Giffords’ seat on her PAC website. Bit unlucky, really.
Now, now, Palin can take care of herself. She won’t retreat; she’ll reload.
Because it’s hard to have a productive democratic discourse when one crew of idiots is threatening to start an armed revolt if they lose a lawful election. End of thread. Anything else I can help you with?
Shhh… it’s designed to inflame Obamacare nuts…shhhhhhh.
That sounds an awful lot like trolling, What the … !!!. Knock it off immediately.
Please explain. If it’s “trolling” I will admit it and apologize.
While you are at it… the only time I ever got an official warning was for being a “jerk”… I never got much of an explanation for that one either.
Marley … please come back… I want to learn.
Or is this just a hasty reaction that you would prefer went away. At least last time you whipped your mod hat off before shitting in my thread as one of the first posters.
Make that the very first poster and it took only three minutes.
Questions about moderator actions go in ATMB.
She injected herself, as you know. Next question?
I don’t know …when did she do that? Apparently before Democrat fingers were pointing at her??
How convenient !
I’ve seen discussions of whether something said in a thread was out of line in that same thread.
So how bout you play mod-wannabe… did I troll when I injected “inject” into the “debate”?
What you’ve probably seen is somebody saying, “what the fuck am I being warned for?” and a mod telling them to start a new thread in ATMB.
Well, I answered the question, so you can draw your own conclusion. Of course, you might be trolling now by asking me if you were trolling then.
I’ve been thinking about this issue a lot over the last week. I have been bemoaning the tone of political speech for a few years now, but the heightened debate in the wake of the Tucson shootings have brought the issue to the fore, so I’ve been spending more than the usual amount of thought on the subject.
Speaking for myself, I never once thought that anyone’s speech caused the shootings in Tucson. I think it’s pretty clear (at least based on what’s been released to date) that Loughner is a very disturbed individual, and I suspect that his thought processes would be near undecipherable to most of us. Holding someone else’s speech to blame for Loughner’s actions implies that we can discover a direct cause and effect relationship between the words uttered and the actions taken. I suspect that is impossible.
I do wonder, however, if rhetorical devices which draw on violent images, or which demonize our political opponents, don’t contribute to an atmosphere which makes it more difficult to see the Loughners in our midst. Is it possible that the widespread use of such language creates “safe havens” for individuals who might otherwise stand out as potentially dangerous? Does talk of “Second Amendment remedies” and of “Reloading” on the part of public figures, some of whom are seeking (or purporting) to represent large numbers of Americans make it a little more socially acceptable to continue and further such talk among the citizenry?
I don’t have any answers, or any data to suggest that what I’m thinking is anywhere close to reality. That’s why I’m in Great Debates and not in General Questions. 
I can’t help but think, however, that all of us, but particularly those of us that enjoy a wide and public forum for our speech, have something of a duty to set a tone for the rest of the country. I think that most people want to be a part of mainstream society; to be seen as responsible, polite members of our nation. If it were less acceptable to talk of doing harm to others, wouldn’t most of us think twice before engaging in such speech, and wouldn’t it then be easier to spot those for whom such speech might be more likely to lead to action?
carlb, you should post more often. IMHO you nailed it.
CMC fnord!
I do have a question for everyone else.
If this,
and this,
and this,
are just slightly over the top rhetoric . . . then I’ll never hear Freddie’s Fashion Mart brought up in any discussion of Al Sharpton ever again, right? :dubious:
Ain’t the same fucking ballpark, it ain’t the same league, it ain’t even the same fucking sport.
:dubious: Watch that shit, What. One thing we’ve learned in America these past ten years: “Working the refs” is usually an admission of weakness, not very cleverly disguised as standing up for your rights.