Sunday, January 09, 2011

Who Or What Can Be Blamed In The Giffords Shooting?

The nation's decent citizens mourn the senseless shooting in Tucson, where Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was injured and 6 others were killed (to include a federal judge and a young child). And PYY will go on the record to condemn such heinous un-American and morally depraved acts to the nth degree, here and in any forum.

I say this because it really was despicable. This kind of thing has no place in any repository of solutions, nor does it go any distance to salvage anything of any value, at all. Nothing was gained from this, and much was lost.

With that said, we all had to know that once this tragic story broke this afternoon is, there would be moronic idiots on the Left who could not wait to classify it politically. In their minds, every gun tragedy must be manipulated into a right wing plot, at the hands of a disaffected, right wing, gun-toting nut job. And as we can see from ITHM, there are many who are laying this directly at the feet of conservative figures like Sarah Palin and the TEA Party Movement in general.

I actually found out about this on Facebook through a posting by Michele Bachmann, who immediately condemned this act and asked her followers for prayers to be offered up for her colleague, and the others who were shot. Other members of Congress and the prominent conservative organizations that I follow on FB did the very same thing.

Immediately after I heard the name of the shooter released, I did a search on Facebook. Before it was taken down, there was a page with the name Jared Laughner (not a typo, it was an "a" instead of an "o") and he just happened to be from Tucson.

It's always possible that it may not have been the same guy, and he may have taken it down because he did not want to be confused with the shooter. I don’t know for a surety and I don't think any of us do. But it was odd.

He had a lot of privacy applications, but did have a few things visible to the public. In his profile pic was a picture of the President. On his "Info" page, he had listed (with pics) a heading that said People who inspired me and he listed the following: Obama, Alinsky, Chomsky, Chavez, Che, Castro, Mao, Stalin, and Arafat.

Again, it has now been taken down and it could be coincidence. But I would be curious to know how many Jared Laughners (or Loughners) there are in Tucson. I did a search on the White Pages and found none. A bit strange maybe, but a cell phone account and/or living in a parent’s basement is all one needs to avoid a listing there.

But since the page is no longer available and it could be said by Left-Wing hate mongers that I am lying, let's look at this more in depth from what we know to be true, what we can prove, and as a result form a logical theory based on reasonable and rational thought.

Giffords was a Blue Dog Democrat who supported gun rights and controlling the border more efficiently. Although she voted for some unpopular bills along the way, she doesn't exactly fit the mold of someone that a true Right-Wing nut job would target for an assassination. And when we put this information with the info I found on the Facebook page, it seems far more likely this was a hit job by a Left-Wing nut job who is hell-bent on sparking a wave of anti-conservative dissent.

The videos he posted on his You Tube account (some of which can be seen in the ITHM post as I will not post them here) were indicative of someone very disturbed and psychotic. The books he listed as his favorites (on the YT site) were also a bit telling, in that he was not specifically interested in literature of a Right-Wing nature.

The books were as follows: Animal Farm, Brave New World, The Wizard Of OZ, Aesop Fables, The Odyssey, Alice Adventures Into Wonderland, Fahrenheit 451, Peter Pan, To Kill A Mockingbird, We The Living, Phantom Toll Booth, One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, Pulp, Through The Looking Glass, The Communist Manifesto, Siddhartha, The Old Man And The Sea, Gulliver’s Travels, Mein Kampf, The Republic, and Meno.

Analyzing this list from a psychological standpoint shows a very disheveled thought process and a typical trait of someone with a very serious thought disorder, as classified by the DSM. But to the Democratic progressive hacks who have nothing better to do than act as if they have the first damned clue about this kind of thing, there is no shame.

The facts are not all out and it may turn out that we may never know them all with crystal clear clarity, especially if the guy is truly a psychotic and delusional mental case. But with the little evidence we have now, we must maintain some level of prudence in our judgments until we know more. Until then, I will reserve my more reasoned judgments for later on when we know more about the case.

STAY TUNED....More to come and I will post more on it later, as I have the time to gather information.

First, some other voices and their thoughts can be found at these excellent blogs:

Fore Left
Always On Watch
AF Ticker
Right Truth
GM's Place
ITHM has more
More links to follow as I can add them.

20 comments:

Always On Watch said...

LA,
Excellent post!

I'll add a link to it in my post.

LASunsett said...

Thanks.... please help get the message out on this. Let's not take this lying down. A nation is at stake here and this is but one way they can derail it further.

Chuck said...

Very well written.

Since he appears to be a leftist loon, it will be the act of a mentally ill person. If he were a right-winger, it would have been political.

This whole thing smelled from the beginning. She didn't seem to be a target for someone from the right. If she were a little more right of center, she may have been someone I would have voted for.

The left will somehow turn this into the fault of Limbaugh, Palin, Beck, etc - it has already started.

Also, they are already using this as a tool for gun control which is ironic since she was a supporter of the gun rights.

I have said it at a couple of sites and I stand by it, I think this is going to bite the left in the arse.

Bottom line, this was horrific whatever the reason.

Always On Watch said...

More and more information is seeping out about Loughner. It seems that he was kicked out of community college and not allowed back in until a mental-health evaluation was done.

Always On Watch said...

LA,
Let's not take this lying down. A nation is at stake here and this is but one way they can derail it further.

I'm with you there.

I'm sure that my students and I will discuss this story in detail in our next American Government class.

Greg said...

Yes, we don't know his political orientation, if any. From information reported on his youtube videos, he appears deranged. He rails against belief in God, the currency, and "mind control through grammar." Completely weird.

However, I thought what the Pima Co. Sheriff had to say last night was important. He mentioned that rhetoric implying or inciting violence can have an effect on deranged people. There are more than a few jerks out there these days talking about changing policy via "exercise of their 2nd Amendment rights." Thinly veiled threat, don't you think? A lot of the anti-Obama rhetoric lately is laced with gun references. I'm not making this up.

Now look at Giffords. Yes, she's a moderate. Moderates are a target these days. If you straddle the aisle, the crazies on both sides hurl invectives at you and threaten you. Giffords had received death threats. Her office had been vandalized. And people opposed to her votes were bringing guns to her public events. These are documented facts.

I am assuming when the Pima Co. Sheriff spoke last night, he had some information about what the killer had to say after his arrest. And in any case, why do people have to oppose policy with violence-laced rhetoric? While GWB was President we saw a play celebrating his fictitious assassination. People on the Left loved it, thought it clever. It wasn't. It was inflammatory.

This doesn't apply to the people who post here, but we all know people who go too far when they talk about politics. I do at least. I spoke recently with a man who is a well-known person in the community I work for. He actually talked about bringing a gun with him to oppose a particular federal policy. I wasn't particularly shocked to hear a "normal" person speaking like this. It has become common. I know he didn't mean it, and he was just speaking about frustration,

but imagine you are a deranged, mentally weak individual, and you have access to a gun, and you are surrounded by rhetoric about taking the country back through violence.

I'm not positive this is what happened here, but it sure seems plausible, if not likely. Imagine a person who is sane and in a position of control using a mentally ill person to commit an assassination.....

Anyway, my point is that the Pima Co. Sheriff's statement that opposing policy with anger and velied threats is harmful to our Democracy. I happen to agree with him.

Greg said...

sorry for the multiple posts.

A.C. McCloud said...

Anyway, my point is that the Pima Co. Sheriff's statement that opposing policy with anger and velied threats is harmful to our Democracy. I happen to agree with him.

We all agree with that. But as sheriff he has no business speculating as to motive before all the interrogations are done unless he knows something the public does not. And if so, he still needs to be quiet until those facts are made public. I realize it was emotional on a very traumatic day but to stand there and blame radio and TV hosts (cough right wingers) in the midst of the tragedy is to inflame both sides even more. All the lefty mainstreamers are pointing to this guy's statement to get their balls rolling.

Greg said...

Whatever the facts turn out to be, the Sheriff is right. Talking about taking the country back through revolution, saying Obama is setting up "FEMA camps" to facilitate his communist takeover (Glenn Beck), talking about mind-control (Jesse Ventura), showing up at political rallies with signs such as "The Tree of Liberty Must Be Refreshed From Time to Time...." Some anti-Giffords asshole brought a gun to one of her recent events and dropped it on the ground.

These are now common occurrences in our political discourse. When W was Prez, Left wing assholes were doing similar things. The fact that this rhetoric CAN incite violence is enough for me. Everyone has the right to be an extremist asshole, but maybe they should think about the effect it's having on our country.

To me, this is an occasion to think about. Whatever the killer's motivation turns out to be.

LASunsett said...

I think the thing we need to consider here is that whether they are of the loony left or loony right, anarchists are of the same mind and goal. The only difference between the two is the reasons they are anarchists. They use the same tactics and the same methods to achieve the same results, all the while they blame the other loony fringe.

We in the middle are the ones that get caught in the crossfire and are made to pay.

There are many people who are liberal whom I love dearly and would never subscribe to this kind heinous act. Likewise, being involved in the TEA Party movement, I have met countless of like-minded people who would never ever condone this kind of thing.

In truth, the political spectrum is a circle and not a linear model like we seem to make it in our arguments ( I am sometimes guilty of it too). In that circular model, the anarchists on both fringes are joined.

Both sides need to stand down on this and unite for this one brief moment or this could get out of hand. If we do, we can isolate the fringe elements and better identify them in the future.

Chuck said...

A.C., I thought the Sheriff's comments were inappropriate. They seemed like he was airing political beliefs. A law enforcement official has no business doing this.

“We have become the capital, the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.”

Agree with him or not, what the hell was a Sheriff doing making a statement like this while investigating a shooting?

His comment was inflammatory and irresponsible.

Always On Watch said...

Greg said:

Talking about taking the country back through revolution, saying Obama is setting up "FEMA camps" to facilitate his communist takeover (Glenn Beck), talking about mind-control (Jesse Ventura), showing up at political rallies with signs such as "The Tree of Liberty Must Be Refreshed From Time to Time...."

There is an air of impending doom going around on the Right. I'm sad to say that I've heard that kind of talk from some of my conservative friends and clients. And, yes, some of my conservative friends are making irrational statements.

But I've heard similar irrationality from the Left too. After all, I went to college in the late 1960s.

In my view, freedom to dissent should not be impaired. Such a path is dangerous to our First Amendment rights.

We've always had extremists among us. Wasn't Patrick Henry one to some extent?

Debbie said...

Thanks for your view on this, rational and correct I believe.

Someone, maybe AOW, said that they believe this does Palin in as to a presidential run. While I like Palin and think she would be a good president, and I'm not in the "she is unelectable" crowd, I think she probably either won't run. I could always be wrong.

We see from this how the Left works, how their mind and machine works. We need to understand this as we go forward. We certainly do not want to act as they do or imitate them, but we need to be prepared.

The bottom line, as I told AOW, is 6 fine people are dead, others are still in the hospital, many emotionally upset, families without their loved ones, because an individual with some form of mental problems went on a shooting spree. He needs to be arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced to death, in my opinion.

Debbie
Right Truth
http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

Kip Hooker said...

Came across your blog through I Hate the Media. Good stuff. Keep it up!

A.C. McCloud said...

Greg, what happened to the president going out and saying "we must not rush to judgment here"? I think it was even MORE appropriate in this event than with Major Hasan, since almost everyone knew he had become a jihadist on the day of the event, and we are fighting them all over the world.

It's the hypocrisy in this unbalanced media environment that produces some of the vitriol. And most of it isn't even gleaned on TV/radio, it's on the internet, but there's the sheriff out there blaming them, followed by Olbermann a few hours later telling the GOP to muzzle Sarah Palin. We can have the debate, I'm good with being responsible, but any debate will turn into a media narrative designed to empower the Democrats.

A.C. McCloud said...

Chuck, I can see where he might let his guard down after losing friends, and let his anger get the best of him, but yes, it was irresponsible to come out and speculate about the motivation of this lunatic. It's not in his job description. Had the shooter been a Muslim yelling about Allah I doubt the sheriff would have been saying stuff about going over and leveling Mecca, etc.

Chuck said...

AC, I agree that he was likely grieving and I do sincerely give him my sympathies for the loss of his friends.

I don't think though that this was a statement made at the scene in a fit of emotion. They were prepared remarks and he came out later and stood by them.

He has a responsibility to remain professional.

I also agree that the internet can be a scary place.

Greg said...

AC: Greg, what happened to the president going out and saying "we must not rush to judgment here"? I think it was even MORE appropriate in this event than with Major Hasan, since almost everyone knew he had become a jihadist on the day of the event, and we are fighting them all over the world.

The President handled this one much better than the Hassan matter. BTW, the Hassan matter appears to have been completely swept under the carpet, but I digress. BHO didn't inflame the situation in this case. Looks like he is learning from his mistakes.

As far as the Sheriff's comments, maybe he was referring to Olbermann as much as he was referring to Glenn Beck. Here's a guy - the Sheriff - who I am sure has been dealing with serious threats against the Congresswoman for many months now. And now here she is shot through the head. Though it's pretty clear the dirtbag who shot her isn't affiliated with any group, it's clear that people on both extremes need to be more responsible. And failing that - b/c you know they won't tone it down - the more moderate among us need to show them the way. I'm glad Sarah Palin took down her map with crosshairs on it, and I hope others follow her example in finding more responsible ways to express themselves. Even if being more responsible doesn't prevent every kook from shooting someone, at least we will have a more civil discourse, which I think would be a good thing.

A.C. McCloud said...

Greg, heated rhetoric at times is the by-product of a free press and free society with speech rights. As can be seen by that goofy bill proposed by the PA congressman, the solutions to such tragedies can be tragic themselves.

I gave the sheriff a little break on his presser Saturday because of the shock of the day, but he's out there this morning saying the same thing with absolutely no proof this kid even listened to radio or TV. More likely it's the internet.

So what do we do if people won't tone down their rhetoric, in all mediums, to keep the nutbars from acting out? We wouldn't want to see LA hauled off one day!

LASunsett said...

To AC and Greg,

As I read your exchanges, I see the respectfulness and a high level/degree of civility in your disagreement. As I read your comments, it's real hard to know that you really even disagree much at all.

That said, I think both of you are correct in your assessments.

I think Greg is right when he says the level of discourse needs to be toned down. I think AC is right when he says that the Sheriff should not have pontificated his opinion so soon after the event and stuck with what we knew up to that point....and that it did give the impression that they were looking in a certain direction for a political purpose.

I think Greg is right when he says it is the responsibility of everyone who is decent to play an integral role in toning down the inflammatory rhetoric, despite the fact there will be many who will not. But in the meantime, I also agree with AC that we must defend vigorously our right to free speech.

About 15 or 16 years ago, the KKK got a permit to hold a rally at the Statehouse downtown. I was incensed that the government even considered such a request, because that group stands for everything I stand against. But an older much wiser man than me told me that in order for me to have a voice to combat that kind of hate speech with truth, I have to allow them the right to make it.

They got the permit, held the rally, and I think they attracted a whopping 20-30 people.

AC said:

//We wouldn't want to see LA hauled off one day!

Herein lies another issue which I must say....er....wait a minute....someone is at the door. I will get back to you.