![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
the latest from loughner's videos
Jan. 15th, 2011 01:44 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
writerspleasure.livejournal.com"... genocide ... tortured [by] low income pay and two wars ..."
yep. sounds like a tea partier to me.
yep. sounds like a tea partier to me.
writerspleasure.livejournal.comdark-weezing.livejournal.comEric Fuller, one of the survivors of the Tuscon shooting, has spoken out against Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, etc. Politico.com is carrying the story, the first link where the actual interview takes place. Special thanks to Hotair.com.
Link: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/1/14/tucson_shooting_survivor_it_looks_like
Link: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47620.html
Chances are, this probably will be the next turn of the story/narrative. I'll sure the talking heads, both Right and Left, will chime in, shortly, so I'll wait until then and update accordingly.
Link: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/1/14/tucson_shooting_survivor_it_looks_like
Link: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47620.html
Chances are, this probably will be the next turn of the story/narrative. I'll sure the talking heads, both Right and Left, will chime in, shortly, so I'll wait until then and update accordingly.
dark-weezing.livejournal.comI've been posting at my Palin comm about today's MSM meme, comparing Sarah Palin's video response vs. President Obama's memorial speech, last night. I was going to take a break from posting on here, but I am compelled by Allahpundit's fair job in summing up both the Palin/Obama compare/contrast and the latest MSM meme, which is based on the Mark Halperin entry I had posted, a few days ago. (The short refresher is, "how dare the Right defend itself after the Left directly or indirectly accuses them of murder without any evidence.")
Link: http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/13/media-meme-o-the-day-obamas-speech-was-much-more-presidential-than-palins/
Link: http://community.livejournal.com/therightfangirl/1366951.html
If anyone wishes to comment on said Palin/Obama compare/contrast, as I'm sure many of you have read at various places, by all means. I must say AP has been particularly insightful on all this, especially on the Left's "political voodoo" theory, which now passes for current Leftist "logic." (Insert your own Earth Logic joke.)
Exit quotation: "To the speechwriters: For extra credit on your assignment, figure out a “presidential” way to explore the theme, “I Didn’t Beam Homicidal Mind Control Rays into that Crazed Gunman’s Brain.” The big joke here, of course, is that the only “presidential” way Palin could have handled this — according to the media, I mean — would be to simply let this whole thing slide. That’s what presidents do, right? Thick skin, stiff upper lip, even when their enemies are being terribly unfair to them. When it comes to politics, that’s business as usual. My point this week, though, and Ace’s point at his site, has been that this episode isn’t business as usual. This isn’t some standard “Palin’s using rhetorical dog whistles for her Christian base!” attack. This is a congresswoman bleeding out of her head on the sidewalk with six bodies lying around her, one of them a little girl, and Palin being blamed for it instantly. And yet according to Keith Ellison, the proper response here should have been to validate that accusation by implication by saying, gee, yeah, I guess I should have toned it down. I’m not known for being a Palin fan (as, er, any actual Palin fan could tell you) and even I can’t contain my indignation at the charge. And yet she’s supposed to just mellow out and take it because political reporters who won’t flatly correct the record for their readers think it’s bad “optics” to do otherwise? Unbelievable."
Link: http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/13/media-meme-o-the-day-obamas-speech-was-much-more-presidential-than-palins/
Link: http://community.livejournal.com/therightfangirl/1366951.html
If anyone wishes to comment on said Palin/Obama compare/contrast, as I'm sure many of you have read at various places, by all means. I must say AP has been particularly insightful on all this, especially on the Left's "political voodoo" theory, which now passes for current Leftist "logic." (Insert your own Earth Logic joke.)
Exit quotation: "To the speechwriters: For extra credit on your assignment, figure out a “presidential” way to explore the theme, “I Didn’t Beam Homicidal Mind Control Rays into that Crazed Gunman’s Brain.” The big joke here, of course, is that the only “presidential” way Palin could have handled this — according to the media, I mean — would be to simply let this whole thing slide. That’s what presidents do, right? Thick skin, stiff upper lip, even when their enemies are being terribly unfair to them. When it comes to politics, that’s business as usual. My point this week, though, and Ace’s point at his site, has been that this episode isn’t business as usual. This isn’t some standard “Palin’s using rhetorical dog whistles for her Christian base!” attack. This is a congresswoman bleeding out of her head on the sidewalk with six bodies lying around her, one of them a little girl, and Palin being blamed for it instantly. And yet according to Keith Ellison, the proper response here should have been to validate that accusation by implication by saying, gee, yeah, I guess I should have toned it down. I’m not known for being a Palin fan (as, er, any actual Palin fan could tell you) and even I can’t contain my indignation at the charge. And yet she’s supposed to just mellow out and take it because political reporters who won’t flatly correct the record for their readers think it’s bad “optics” to do otherwise? Unbelievable."
Two WSJ op-eds for you
Jan. 13th, 2011 01:12 pmdark-weezing.livejournal.comRather than devote separate entries, I'll just combine two Wall Street Journal entries into one.
1. Daniel Henninger sums up deftly what motivated the Left in their Tuscon shootings rhetoric: political calculation and personal belief. We've heard it elsewhere, but it's essential to have Henninger's take.
Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576076373704758778.html
2. Karl Rove waxes about the selection of Bill Daley as Robert Gibbs' replacement, and how his centrism may influence the Obama presidency in the future. We'll see, won't we?
Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704803604576077813329940804.html
As always, you make the call.
1. Daniel Henninger sums up deftly what motivated the Left in their Tuscon shootings rhetoric: political calculation and personal belief. We've heard it elsewhere, but it's essential to have Henninger's take.
Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576076373704758778.html
2. Karl Rove waxes about the selection of Bill Daley as Robert Gibbs' replacement, and how his centrism may influence the Obama presidency in the future. We'll see, won't we?
Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704803604576077813329940804.html
As always, you make the call.
Arizona Aftermath
Jan. 13th, 2011 09:23 amarkadelos.livejournal.comhttp://thenewagenda.net/2011/01/10/murdered-girl-had-political-aspirations-was-symbol-of-american-life/
http://thenewagenda.net/2011/01/10/heroic-woman-helps-save-lives-in-shooting-rampage/
http://thenewagenda.net/2011/01/12/this-has-got-to-stop/
http://thenewagenda.net/2011/01/13/congresswoman-giffords-101-chance-of-surviving/
http://thenewagenda.net/2011/01/10/heroic-woman-helps-save-lives-in-shooting-rampage/
http://thenewagenda.net/2011/01/12/this-has-got-to-stop/
http://thenewagenda.net/2011/01/13/congresswoman-giffords-101-chance-of-surviving/
dark-weezing.livejournal.comThe Subject line says it all, and Allahpundit will guide you in. I'm just not up for the rest, at the moment. Per the memorial service that's currently running, I'll just wait for the talking heads to opine. (If anyone wishes to use the entry to discuss on such, fine by me.)
Link: http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/12/palin-aide-shes-getting-death-threats-at-unprecedented-levels/
Exit quotation: "Now, let’s see tomorrow how the media and the left react to this story. There’ll be three responses, I assume. One: “Hey, maybe we should tone down the rhetoric on Palin before she gets shot.” If so much as one person offers that, consider it a victory. Two: “I condemn the threats, but we can’t be held responsible for the actions of crazies.” That’s actually the right answer, I think, or at least it would be if they’d been criticizing her for something she’d actually done. Having invented the Loughner connection out of thin air, though? Nope. Three: “She’s lying, either to turn down the heat on herself and earn sympathy or because she enjoys the media spotlight.” Mind you, there’s actual documentary evidence of some of the threats, but this will be the default explanation anyway thanks to the magical civility gene that makes liberals who are mentally ill somehow utterly immune to the worst rhetorical excesses. Demonize Palin all you want — have Paul Krugman and Frank Rich scream in the face of an untreated schizophrenic that she’s the prophesied antichrist — and it won’t motivate him a bit, because even deranged liberals are ultimately too smart and civilized to do anything wingnutty like take a shot at someone. That, as best as I understand it, is the going theory for why the left’s endless casual assertions about the basic malevolence of the right — racist, sexist, fascist, plutocratic, 50 times a day in assertions great and small — can be shrugged off as harmless to even the most diseased sympathetic mind. “Only fruitcakes” would act on stuff like that. Right, Jared?"
Link: http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/12/palin-aide-shes-getting-death-threats-at-unprecedented-levels/
Exit quotation: "Now, let’s see tomorrow how the media and the left react to this story. There’ll be three responses, I assume. One: “Hey, maybe we should tone down the rhetoric on Palin before she gets shot.” If so much as one person offers that, consider it a victory. Two: “I condemn the threats, but we can’t be held responsible for the actions of crazies.” That’s actually the right answer, I think, or at least it would be if they’d been criticizing her for something she’d actually done. Having invented the Loughner connection out of thin air, though? Nope. Three: “She’s lying, either to turn down the heat on herself and earn sympathy or because she enjoys the media spotlight.” Mind you, there’s actual documentary evidence of some of the threats, but this will be the default explanation anyway thanks to the magical civility gene that makes liberals who are mentally ill somehow utterly immune to the worst rhetorical excesses. Demonize Palin all you want — have Paul Krugman and Frank Rich scream in the face of an untreated schizophrenic that she’s the prophesied antichrist — and it won’t motivate him a bit, because even deranged liberals are ultimately too smart and civilized to do anything wingnutty like take a shot at someone. That, as best as I understand it, is the going theory for why the left’s endless casual assertions about the basic malevolence of the right — racist, sexist, fascist, plutocratic, 50 times a day in assertions great and small — can be shrugged off as harmless to even the most diseased sympathetic mind. “Only fruitcakes” would act on stuff like that. Right, Jared?"
respond, leftists. now.
Jan. 12th, 2011 05:27 pmwriterspleasure.livejournal.comwe know what your reaction would have been if sarah palin had said this about giffords:
"Instead of running [to represent Arizona] they ought to have her and shoot her. Put her against the wall and shoot her."
and you would have been right. and i know that a number of people here, i among them, would have been with you. shooting innocent persons is a violation of their individual rights, their liberty, and individual liberty is precious to us.
okay, so: to use your favorite locution: where were you when this was said -
"Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have [Rick Scott] and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him."
who said that? the terrifying teabagger paul kanjorski. y'know, the guy who airily opined in the new york times op-ed page yesterday: "it is incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect in which political discourse can flow freely, without fear of violent confrontation." "Paul E. Kanjorski (born April 2, 1937) is the former U.S. Representative for Pennsylvania's 11th congressional district, serving from 1985 until 2011. He is a member of the Democratic Party. The district includes the cities of Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, and Hazleton, as well as most of the Poconos." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_E._Kanjorski
where were you there? no targeting marks. no "hidden threat of violence beneath the surface" (the best kind of violence - the kind that doesn't manifest yet can be used against your political opponent). an open call to assassinate a political opponent.
now listen to kanjorski's excuse. it is priceless: Reached by phone Tuesday, Kanjorski said "only fruitcakes" would take his statement about Scott literally. The 73-year-old Democrat from Nanticoke, who this fall lost in his bid for a 14th term representing the 11th Congressional District, admitted he's well known for using "colorful language." "I probably would never have made the statement if I anticipated anything like this happening," Kanjorski said. "It was obviously not in humor, but not literally."
- http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/kanjorski-only-fruitcakes-would-take-my-call-shoot-governor-liter
don't like the washington examiner? let's use the notorious tea party rag, the wall street journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704803604576077892006683586.html
so when a democrat openly calls for assassination, it's just "colorful language" that "only a fruitcake" (!!!) would be influenced by - and that makes it okay. but targeting marks of the same order used by dems - by the way, surveyors shoot a line - those have magical demon powers when used by sarah palin.
okay, leftists. so where were you? how many crazies is kanjorski's call for assassination influencing right now, and how will it come out? how many crazies are being influenced by your frothing about bushitler, end of the world, global uninhabitability, etc.? and what are you going to do about - by your own premises - your own responsibility for violence.
answer. now. rationalize away kanjorski's call for assassination and your own utter lack of response. explain to us the subtle ways in which a democrat's call for murder is A-OK.
"Instead of running [to represent Arizona] they ought to have her and shoot her. Put her against the wall and shoot her."
and you would have been right. and i know that a number of people here, i among them, would have been with you. shooting innocent persons is a violation of their individual rights, their liberty, and individual liberty is precious to us.
okay, so: to use your favorite locution: where were you when this was said -
"Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have [Rick Scott] and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him."
who said that? the terrifying teabagger paul kanjorski. y'know, the guy who airily opined in the new york times op-ed page yesterday: "it is incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect in which political discourse can flow freely, without fear of violent confrontation." "Paul E. Kanjorski (born April 2, 1937) is the former U.S. Representative for Pennsylvania's 11th congressional district, serving from 1985 until 2011. He is a member of the Democratic Party. The district includes the cities of Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, and Hazleton, as well as most of the Poconos." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_E._Kanjorski
where were you there? no targeting marks. no "hidden threat of violence beneath the surface" (the best kind of violence - the kind that doesn't manifest yet can be used against your political opponent). an open call to assassinate a political opponent.
now listen to kanjorski's excuse. it is priceless: Reached by phone Tuesday, Kanjorski said "only fruitcakes" would take his statement about Scott literally. The 73-year-old Democrat from Nanticoke, who this fall lost in his bid for a 14th term representing the 11th Congressional District, admitted he's well known for using "colorful language." "I probably would never have made the statement if I anticipated anything like this happening," Kanjorski said. "It was obviously not in humor, but not literally."
- http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/kanjorski-only-fruitcakes-would-take-my-call-shoot-governor-liter
don't like the washington examiner? let's use the notorious tea party rag, the wall street journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704803604576077892006683586.html
so when a democrat openly calls for assassination, it's just "colorful language" that "only a fruitcake" (!!!) would be influenced by - and that makes it okay. but targeting marks of the same order used by dems - by the way, surveyors shoot a line - those have magical demon powers when used by sarah palin.
okay, leftists. so where were you? how many crazies is kanjorski's call for assassination influencing right now, and how will it come out? how many crazies are being influenced by your frothing about bushitler, end of the world, global uninhabitability, etc.? and what are you going to do about - by your own premises - your own responsibility for violence.
answer. now. rationalize away kanjorski's call for assassination and your own utter lack of response. explain to us the subtle ways in which a democrat's call for murder is A-OK.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}