Offside Number 76 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Can you provide a link that it was the right who influenced the guy? A reference saying he acted on behalf of those on the right or one that he was acting alone even? I cannot, nor have I EVER said that he was. UConn stated that the suspect is a liberal. I asked for information on that. All I have read about the guy's political views are (1) that he is NOT a tea partier and (2) that he may have belonged to a white supremacy group, which group denied that he was a member. Asking someone to back up their point is not the same as having the opposite viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 See that is the problem with our society... We pigeon-hole things away when they get too "political" and/or confrontational. There is no reason why politicas can't be discussed more, no matter who gets their feathers in a ruffle, That is how we are supposed to act in a free society... Yet, a lot do not have the guts to live in the real wordl because it "may offend." IMO, there is no reason why this thread should be moved... But I am not the powers that be... Just my 2 cents. I don't care what people think politically, no big deal... I cannot, nor have I EVER said that he was. UConn stated that the suspect is a liberal. I asked for information on that. All I have read about the guy's political views are (1) that he is NOT a tea partier and (2) that he may have belonged to a white supremacy group, which group denied that he was a member. Asking someone to back up their point is not the same as having the opposite viewpoint. UConn was quoting not a primary source... Just a young female that was quoted as saying that the perp seemed to be liberal and left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I cannot, nor have I EVER said that he was. UConn stated that the suspect is a liberal. I asked for information on that. All I have read about the guy's political views are (1) that he is NOT a tea partier and (2) that he may have belonged to a white supremacy group, which group denied that he was a member. Asking someone to back up their point is not the same as having the opposite viewpoint. That is my point, though. All of this is hearsay. There are not enough facts to say anything about him. All the press has been able to cover is the political spins by each party and that is what this thread is centered upon; a Sheriff running his mouth too much. I want my singers to sing, my actors to act, my sheriffs to sheriff - I do not want them to be figure heads for their beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I just have to say it... And throw it out there... When AD and DC finally snap: "They seemed pretty liberal, left." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 (2) that he may have belonged to a white supremacy group, which group denied that he was a member. You know somebody is wacko when even the white supremecist groups come out and say they don't have anything to do with them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offside Number 76 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) UConn was quoting not a primary source... Just a young female that was quoted as saying that the perp seemed to be liberal and left. All I'm looking for is the source; if it's a young female who said so, then I'd like to see it. That is my point, though. All of this is hearsay. There are not enough facts to say anything about him. All the press has been able to cover is the political spins by each party and that is what this thread is centered upon; a Sheriff running his mouth too much. I want my singers to sing, my actors to act, my sheriffs to sheriff - I do not want them to be figure heads for their beliefs. I want my sheriffs to sheriff, too. Part of that job is telling people to cool it. At the beginning of all of this, frankly, I had assumed the guy was a Republican, since he's (a) a sheriff, and (b) in Arizona. Didn't matter to me what political party he belonged to. He's doing his job by telling people that words have consequences. And what's scary, is, his words are nearly the same as those of Ms. Giffords herself in this video: It's about 2:25 in. And the counterpoint to her statement (about 2:30 in) is valid, too. You know somebody is wacko when even the white supremecist groups come out and say they don't have anything to do with them no kidding. Edited January 9, 2011 by Offsides Number 76 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) That is my point, though. All of this is hearsay. There are not enough facts to say anything about him. All the press has been able to cover is the political spins by each party and that is what this thread is centered upon; a Sheriff running his mouth too much. I want my singers to sing, my actors to act, my sheriffs to sheriff - I do not want them to be figure heads for their beliefs. There is a violent sub-culture that has been brewing ever since the New Deal and the liberalizing of society. I am not saying the nutty left don't act out... But it is undeniable the nutty right do act out in these types of violence more. True, the facts aren't all in yet and yes the guy may have leaned left, right or whatever. The lashing out in violent ways against the powers that be when somebody is disempowered... And the disempowered people the last 80 years have been the conservatives and moreso in the last 2 than any other time in the last 30 since the whole "conservative revolution" took hold in 1980. All I'm looking for is the source; if it's a young female who said so, then I'd like to see it. From post #55 in the other thread: NYT article: Another former high school classmate said that Mr. Loughner's politics were left of center, and that he may have met Representative Giffords, who was shot in the head outside the Safeway supermarket, sometime before the attack. "As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal. & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy," the former classmate, Caitie Parker, wrote in a series of Twitter feeds Saturday. "I haven't seen him since '07 though. He became very reclusive." You know somebody is wacko when even the white supremecist groups come out and say they don't have anything to do with them :rolleyes: The supremecists may be wacko... But they are not dumb (well at least some... )... Why would they condone this, even if they really did? No doubt they are cheering at an almost dead Dem congress"critter" and 9 year old that was most likely doomed to poverty and illiteracy (if the 9 year old was a contituent of the district)... Edited January 9, 2011 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offside Number 76 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 NYT article: Another former high school classmate said that Mr. Loughner’s politics were left of center, and that he may have met Representative Giffords, who was shot in the head outside the Safeway supermarket, sometime before the attack. “As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal. & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy,” the former classmate, Caitie Parker, wrote in a series of Twitter feeds Saturday. “I haven’t seen him since ’07 though. He became very reclusive.” Thank you. So UConn wasn't making this part up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I just have to say it... And throw it out there... When AD and DC finally snap: "They seemed pretty liberal, left." I promise, when I blow a gasket, I'll gun down legislators in a strictly non-partisan manner and try to keep the collateral damage to a bare minimum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 It's about 2:25 in. And the counterpoint to her statement (about 2:30 in) is valid, too. This is just too........strange? I had never seen that clip before, but watching the whole thing it is nothing but soundbites. I should count the times she said change. Go look @ 3:55 when she is asked about how Democrats may use this to further their agenda and she gives an amazing no answer and it leads you to believe that it is acceptible to use as a political point There is a violent sub-culture that has been brewing ever since the New Deal and the liberalizing of society. I am not saying the nutty left don't act out... But it is undeniable the nutty right do act out in these types of violence more. True, the facts aren't all in yet and yes the guy may have leaned left, right or whatever. The lashing out in violent ways against the powers that be when somebody is disempowered... And the disempowered people the last 80 years have been the conservatives and moreso in the last 2 than any other time in the last 30 since the whole "conservative revolution" took hold in 1980. I fully understand your point and I respect everything you just said, so please do not take this the wrong way... By this statement you can easily expect the blacks to rebel against the white man, and the jews to avenge themselves, too. I do not think it is about disempowering any group, I think it is more opportunity. It is as much about being disempowered as it is oportunity. This guy, just like any other in the past, only now did so out of opportunity; the chance to get so close to the victims, the whole situation - it has little to do with who's in office and more the thoughts and motives of the whacko. The sit-ins by the left, the campaigns, etc are the same thing. Disrupting business by chaining yourself to a business is just as destructive as throwing rocks at a campaign office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offside Number 76 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This is just too........strange? I had never seen that clip before, but watching the whole thing it is nothing but soundbites. I should count the times she said change. Go look @ 3:55 when she is asked about how Democrats may use this to further their agenda and she gives an amazing no answer and it leads you to believe that it is acceptible to use as a political point It is creepy, isn't it? I mean, she absolutely presaged the attack. I don't agree with your second point, though; I just don't get that out of the video. I thought her larger point was that extremists on both sides--she did use that phrase--should calm the f down. The sit-ins by the left, the campaigns, etc are the same thing. Disrupting business by chaining yourself to a business is just as destructive as throwing rocks at a campaign office. But not quite as disruptive as shooting a congresswoman, blowing up a federal building, or killing a doctor who performs abortions. I think Exiled is right, when the rightwing nutjobs get crazy, it's more severe than when the leftwing nutjobs get crazy. Lately. In the earlier part of the last century, it was quite the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I think Exiled is right, when the rightwing nutjobs get crazy, it's more severe than when the leftwing nutjobs get crazy. Lately. In the earlier part of the last century, it was quite the opposite. Because Democrats are too afraid of guns! Kidding... Give it time, with this speech about change and how we must take back the government the Left will get violent. After all the press and influence the violence has offered. Please, notice, I said LEFT not Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I promise, when I blow a gasket, I'll gun down legislators in a strictly non-partisan manner and try to keep the collateral damage to a bare minimum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offside Number 76 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Because Democrats are too afraid of guns! Kidding... Give it time, with this speech about change and how we must take back the government the Left will get violent. After all the press and influence the violence has offered. Please, notice, I said LEFT not Democrats. Nah. Too many peaceniks who think that it's clever to dump a truckload of manure in the middle of Pennsylvania Ave before a WTO meeting (I witnessed this) or to scale the Washington Monument with a PETA banner (this, too) or to chain themselves to things. And you may have been joking about guns, but there's some truth to that. Not too many liberals carry handguns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Because Democrats are too afraid of guns! Kidding... Give it time, with this speech about change and how we must take back the government the Left will get violent. After all the press and influence the violence has offered. Please, notice, I said LEFT not Democrats. No doubt! But... It will look something along these lines: Tree Mugger Rug-Munched Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Sometimes you do not have to have the writing on the wall to read between the lines. The history of the fella can lead anyone with half a wits sense to a conclusion. I am not going to look for a link, I have seen enough to draw my opinions that the guy is a a pretty far left liberal and is using politic-speak to place blame. What he should do, being an officer of the law is simply say "the guy was a whacko, we will continue to investigate this and turn it over to the prosecutor. At this time we will provide no more information." Then he goes back to doing his job instead of trying to be the next Sheriff Hege. So, jboy, oh wise one, you can draw that conclusion? How? Because the kid is described as having smoked dope? Listening to his iPod? Are you as big a lunatic as you come off, that you can interpret the kids ramblings as being "liberal"? And, "a pretty far left liberal" to boot? Is it his ramblings about the illiteracy amongst the voters in his area? How are you coming to this conclusion? Your argument makes no more sense, and is based on as much stereotyping as you are accusing Dupnik, and Offsides of using... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) Haha. As for ongoing riots, there have been verbal riots going on for more than a decade. Needs to stop. That was his point. Anyway, all I really asked for was (1) a quote where the sheriff blamed the Right for inciting the attack and (2) something showing that the suspect is a liberal. Seeing nothing, I'm going to have to assume that UConn just made it all up. As for my own politics, I'm pretty middle of the road. That's why all the vitriol pisses me off; it prevents real dialogue. I would have been disappointed to learn that this sheriff had blamed conservative groups, but it doesn't look like he did. Dude, there's a link and quote from the NYT article in the 10th post in this thread where someone who knew him from classes described the suspect as "quite liberal." WTF!? Edited January 10, 2011 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Dude, there's a link and quote from the NYT article in the 10th post in this thread where someone who knew him from classes described the suspect as "quite liberal." WTF!? I think post 55... Yet, a chick from class... Is a real fine judge! UConn... You are stooping to the Times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I have to ask...If Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are going to turn me into a killer, does that mean Keith Olbermann and MSNBC are going to turn me into a pansy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 So, jboy, oh wise one, you can draw that conclusion? How? Because the kid is described as having smoked dope? Listening to his iPod? Are you as big a lunatic as you come off, that you can interpret the kids ramblings as being "liberal"? And, "a pretty far left liberal" to boot? Is it his ramblings about the illiteracy amongst the voters in his area? How are you coming to this conclusion? Your argument makes no more sense, and is based on as much stereotyping as you are accusing Dupnik, and Offsides of using... The kid is a whacko because anyone who goes on a shooting rampage just ain't all there! Dope doesn't have anything to do with it, it's a sad tragedy and I am only quoting as what a few sites have said about the guy being a liberal extremist, the videos he's made and his own statements. Whatever label you want to place on him he did a bad thing and the Sheriff is that last one who should be casting judgement, especially in a public forum upon the guy. Why didn't this guy go out and better the world? The fact that he attempted to join the military and did not get in shows he might have had good direction at one time - but he still failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts