Monday, January 10, 2011

This Just In




This just in: it appears that Jared Lee Loughner, the man charged in the attempted assassination of Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), was a leftist... yeah, that's it... a loony leftist Communist Nazi with an obsession with grammar who attacked Representative Giffords Saturday for her grammar and support of Obama's far-left... wait, that makes no sense. I mean, Giffords was a moderate Democrat who... No, wait, um... Socialism! Um... Liberal Agenda! Er...

Back to you, Bret.

As the right-wing propaganda machine spins into overdrive in a feeble attempt to disassociate from its own rhetoric, let's think for a minute. What if we assume, and I know it will be difficult, but let's just assume they are correct, and that Jared Lee Loughner was a lone crazy with no political motivations. Maybe so. Maybe (koff, choke) FOX is right on the money with this.

Where did anyone ever get the idea that this had anything to do with right-wing politics?
COLOR RKBA Glock Auto Decal

That isn't a Glock pictured over the red, white, and blue? Is it?
Sticker
Oh, wait... I think it could be.



Unarmed? I guess you're referring to people with disabilities or something?



Well, golly. Aren't those just surveyor symbols? Hm. Maybe.



Oh, right. That looks just like a (simulated) surveyor's transit. My bad. Funny, I've never seen anyone reload a transit before.


Michele Bachmann (R-MN) then: "I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us 'having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,' and the people -- we the people -- are going to have to fight back hard if we're not going to lose our country."

Michele Bachmann (R-MN) now: "My tears are flowing, and I am stunned and angered that Gabby Giffords was savagely gunned down while performing her congressional duties."

Armed and dangerous? Well, I suppose she did specifically say Minnesota, right?

In related news, Speaker of the House and noted crybaby John Boehner (R-OH) managed to remain composed while churning out standard boilerplate on the event. I mean, it's just some people who were shot, not a real tearjerker like, I don't know... cap-and-trade?

Glenn "Becky" Beck (R-FOX) said "the violence is going to come, and it's going to come from the left." Well, maybe. All those Subarus with bumper stickers saying "Coexist" are just a front. The automatic weapons are hidden under the bags of organic soy protein. What's that? The Democrats had a "target map" too? Well, I suppose. On the other hand, that map didn't put specific candidates in crosshairs. Maybe it was a call for liberals to begin carpet bombing New Mexico? I don't know.

So here's the deal. I'll give Republicans and Teapers every benefit of the doubt and far more charity than they deserve. We'll assume that Loughner was certifiably batshit loony and got his inspiration beamed directly into his teeth by little green men from Mars. Fine. Still, when things you have explicitly called for happen and people look in your direction? Well, sorry. Too bad. Think about that over the long weekend.

And remember, when three-named idiots express their opinions with a gun, it's not usually the conservatives that have to watch out.



Disgustedly Yours,



Porcupine

Porcupine




18 comments:

Ananda girl said...

The man is a nut. Why do we need more explanation? Will it make more sense if we know he was right,left or standing on his head in the middle?

TechnoBabe said...

For a young man to hate to that extreme and plan and carry out mass murders is not something to be swept under the rug. There have been some very cold and ugly comments like a comment on Sarah Palin's Facebook page. The comment was cruel and ignorant regarding the nine year old girl who was killed. I am not singling out Palin, and for me, I don't care what political party someone is for or what color of skin they have, we cannot kill other human beings. And as far as I am concerned, inciting others to kill is killing.

Hilary said...

The Amurikan way has me scratching my head often - for what is defended and for what is opposed.

Well written, my prickly friend.

Jeni said...

Oh, but did you see Palin defending her remarks about encouraging people to "arm" themselves? Gee, who would have thought that she only meant that as an encouragement for people to vote, as that was the type of armament she believes in. (I'm paraphrasing a bit there.) While it may be a way to express to people the necessity to vote -aren't there many other ways to word things that can't be construed by those who lean just a little too far away from the "norm" so that her true meaning is then expressed? Or maybe, just maybe, she and others of her ilk, do want to use words, phrases and such that would incite people to such a state that they would gladly go and fire on politicians, innocent bystanders, even young children. Since we censor virtually everything else now, all must be "PC" then why not censor speech so it isn't possible to consider it inflammatory? I don't like to even think about censorship to be honest but gee, sometimes people do need to censor themselves by asking how what they are saying will be interpreted or could easily be misunderstood by various factions.

Suldog said...

The problem with this entire situation, aside from the obvious one of people dying, is that every a-hole in the country will use it for his or her own purposes.

Whatever the dolt who shot folks may or may not have believed, or whom he may have listened to, or what sum of events and places and other input brought him to his idiotic decision, it is now open season (if you'll excuse such a gun-related phrase) on every right we have as United States citizens. Those who want to limit (fill in your freedom) will use it as an excuse to craft legislation to that end.

What is most important, in my extremely humble opinion, is for those of us who regard freedom itself as sacrosanct to band together and not let this country be bullied into accepting anything less than freedom (no matter how odious we may find someone else's use of that freedom). Just as following 9/11, there are "Patriot Acts" on the horizon. My fervent hope is that we remain sane and enact NONE.

Cricket said...

Hi Ananda - I've missed you. Sorry I've been incommunicado. Hope to fix that soon.

Anyway, I think it matters, at least to me, because this sort of thing has been pretty much called for. And worse, it has been called for not only by extremists, but by mainstream candidates and sitting Congresspeople.

Of course, now that there have been actual deaths, many of these folks are backpedaling saying : we didn't mean it literally. Now is not the time to be pointing fingers (at us) in a political way.

Really? Why not?

Meanwhile, keep in mind, the media is warning you to be scared of me. Because, remember, I'm out to destroy the country. I must be. I heard it on FOX.

Even if Loughner had no right-wing connections at all, based on the record, he sure seems to have done 'em a solid.

Cricket said...

Hi Suldog - AMEN. No new laws. They're not needed, whether they have to do with guns or speech.

Personally, I think the gun laws where I live are ok. A license, perhaps, and a waiting period before you can buy a handgun. Less (I think) for a rifle or shotgun. Seems reasonable. Though I'm more of a fishing person, I pretty much agree with the gun people that gun laws only affect those who are willing to obey the law.

And I certainly believe in free speech. On the other hand, should you choose to use it in the manner I've described here, don't be surprised if people come looking at you later. What? Who? ME?

Yeah, you!

Are the Republicans/Teapers to blame? Maybe not, but they really shouldn't wonder why some people might think so.

Like Giffords herself, before the shooting. Or her husband afterwards, for example.

But on the issue of new laws, I'll second that motion. Just say no!

Jillsy Girl said...

Who can get in the head of seriously disturbed person? Who could ever know what pushes them over the edge to kill, BUT shouldn't we be smart enough as a society to try and make sure WE are NOT the ones who do the pushing. Violent rhetoric needs to end!

Andy said...

Hi Cricket! Happy New Year, again! Just stopped by to read the comments on your post.

Very entertaining, as always.

Happy New Year!

Andy said...

BTW, Cricket. Since we're picturing chicks with guns: http://bornagainredneck.blogspot.com/2011/01/eek-its-palins-fault-she-was.html

Cricket said...

Hi Andy - Thanks for your visit and I apologize for not returning it yet. Happy New Year to you and yours as well.

Just to clarify one point here. I am not among those who would say this shooting is the "fault" of the Tea Party or Ms. Palin. That does not seem to be the case.

Even so, there seem to be others who can't imagine why anyone would even think that could be, as if it's all just political posturing.

Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly.

Um... is there more than one way to read that?

As far as Sarah Palin goes, while I don't believe, as some do, that she has "blood on her hands," the surveyor symbol excuse has to be one of the weakest lies I've ever heard. You build up a gun-totin' Mama Grizzly persona, then come up with that? My sons could do better.

Blame her staff if you like, but it's still pitiful. What she should have said would be something like this:

"In my state of Alaska, we celebrate the outdoor life blah blah blah hunting, fishing, and sportsmanship blah blah blah. While in hindsight my choice of imagery seems regrettable blah blah blah I was never intending to imply blah blah blah but rather use images from hunting, a sport which blah blah blah."

It would still be a lie, of course, but at least it would be plausible. Instead, we got "surveyor symbols." Message: I don't give a shit, and neither do my fans.

As I said to Suldog, I'm not a big gun control person. and I absolutely support free speech, for all of us - me, you, the Tea Party... hell, the Klan, for that matter. That's what free speech means. I don't want new laws.

Even so, if you say dumb things, and you get called on it, that's too bad.

I find it ironic that, in the linked picture, Rep. Giffords appears to be firing an AK. Further proof that the Democrats are communists?

lime said...

i think suldog said it best. all this is going to do is further polarize the right and left and we'll have a bunch of knee-jerk responses and fingerpointing. yeah, i'm jaded.

Andy said...

Lime, you're just a realist. EVERY event polarizes the left and the right.

The weather, sports, beauty pageants...you name it! EVERY stinkin' aspect of human life is politicized, and USED.

Personally, I believe it is backfiring on both sides. At least I hope so. Honestly, you can only cry wolf so many times.

Two weeks ago there was a fire alarm at a certain station in the hospital where I work. I almost broke my neck to get there (it's part of my job). It was a false alarm. Last week (at roughly the same time of the same day) there was another. I responded to it quickly, but without fear in my heart of what I'd find.

I am almost certain that next Sunday, about 2 pm there will be another alarm go off in the same station. I will respond to it, but I'll walk, and not bother to lug a fire extinguisher...because I know what the problem is...and it's not a fire.

Maybe that's not a good parallel, but that's the way I see the "alarmists," and how the public will eventually respond to them.

Ho hum... It's THEM again...

Buck said...

Just to clarify one point here. I am not among those who would say this shooting is the "fault" of the Tea Party or Ms. Palin. That does not seem to be the case.

Thanks for that. The main post caused me to think otherwise, yanno?

Barbara Shallue said...

Ditto Suldog. It's a tragedy, and in the American tradition, I fear it's going to be used by both sides somehow... I only hope they use it to temper the hateful, violent, half-truth rhetoric. I won't put any money on that, though.

Cricket said...

Hi Buck - Well, I tried to word it well... maybe it didn't make it.

I don't believe for a minute that Sarah Palin wanted those people on her list dead. On the other hand, there have been an awful lot of calls for "2nd amendment solutions" or variations on that theme this cycle that all of a sudden didn't look so smart.

Let's just say that folks were pretty quick to move from condolences to "don't blame me... I didn't do it... um... I just said... um... Hey, look! Something shiny!"

And "surveyor symbols?" You're shitting me, right? That's the best ya got?

So the Tea Party comes out clean on this. You still can't blame folks for looking in that direction first, I don't think.

But with that said, you know something? I miss Walter Cronkite, and I'm serious on that. I'm just old enough to remember when there was real news coverage.

Thanks for stopping by.

Mike Z said...

Met your blog through Suldog's (which I found from Magazine Man's). But thought I might venture an opinion on the subject. I think the problem evidenced here is fudamentally a problem with education (as in, our current educational system does not produce mature citizens who reason soundly, act respectfully and live compassionately). The resulting nature of our political (and much of our social) discourse is crude, hostile, contentious and accusatory. The sort of ignorant rhetoric and behavior which we see so often can only lead to greater separation among us. It is not just regrettable, is is destructive. But, I think it starts in school.

Land of shimp said...

Cricket, where are you? Hiding behind Porcupine? You'll get a quill in the nose that way.

Hey there, you know I just realized I didn't have you on my blog list. I have no idea why, I could have sworn I did. Anyway, I've rectified that situation.

The thing is, the man in question is mentally ill. Trying to assign motivations and reasons is a fool's errand. He's almost certainly schizophrenic, that's the long and short of the explanation.

Despite what crime procedure shows would have us believe, schizophrenics are rarely violent. They are locked in worlds of private misery and torment but rarely violent. This young man was the exception.

I'm very sorry for the loss of life but whereas his target was political, his reasons for doing so are lost in the intricacies of his madness.

If there is anyone or anything to be blamed it is our societal indifference to mental illness, which we still stigmatize so much that people frequently don't get the treatment they need.

So who caused this? No one other than the shooter and his illness induced demons but we can move towards preventing another such occurrence if we finally move our mindset from the middle ages when it comes to mental illness.

Schizophrenia is tragic disease, but it is also a treatable one. There are a lot of tragedies in this situation but one them is that a young man was never treated for something that has available treatment. It could have saved lives.

Pity I never have an opinion on anything, I know. Good to see you!