Democratic Congresswoman Among 12 Shot in Arizona

We've got you to blow that dog whistle, day in and day out.

 

Well, there is that pesky First Amendment thingy.

 

But was that the "liberal media" or was it the rush to get something out there to people without waiting to see if it's pertinent? In sports, we're burned sometimes because we rush to get news of a coaching hire or some other crap out there that, on the grand scale, is really pretty meaningless.

Was what we saw here the news-side version of that. I don't doubt that some of the blogs that were out there tossing it around had a liberal bias, but when the mainstream media ran with it, was it a matter of them wanting to tarnish Palin, or was it that a lot of people early on assumed this was either (a) a politically motivated killer or (b) a complete psycho, or maybe a little of both? In the rush to get the story out there in the 24-hour news world, there wasn't a chance to gather a lot about this guy before putting something out there; you had to put things out there as they were thrown out, including crap that's thrown out on the Web.

Maybe some let their personal views come into play, but I have literally heard people in Oklahoma, and read posts on websites, where people say things would be better if Obama was assassinated, or Democrats should be removed from office by any means necessary. Hell, I saw a psycho who bought into that kind of crap blow up a building before anyone else in the country gave a damn about terrorism. My first instinct was that this was some psycho like him who went too far. Was I right? No, was totally wrong. But I didn't need Sarah Palin's map to make me think there was a link. I've seen enough rhetoric (from people, fueled by politicians) that makes that map look silly.

In the end, I think a lot of reporters were throwing things out there that they shouldn't have, but I don't think most of it was out of some kind of bias. I think it was because they saw something out there that would get people talking, would get ratings up, and they didn't worry about getting the whole picture. Welcome to 21st century media. Doesn't make it right, but seems to be the way things work these days.

 

Yes, but at least the radical left had the good grace not to start a political party around Abby Hoffman and Jerry Rubin.

 

When I first heard the news I thought of Keith Olberman who thrust Giffords into the national spotlight by going against NBC policy and donating money to her campaign.

Until Olberman suspension I had never ever heard of Giffords.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/jared-loughner-money-trail-familys-lifestyle-aided-monkey/story?id=12587114

Hurt himself on the monkey bars as a kid, family reached settlement with elementary school.

 

No one refutes that Palin's name was flying around from the start. As were statements indicating she should face charges and trials for her complicit behavior. Absolutely asinine. And I wouldn't elect her county dog catcher.

JRoyal - I appreciate your post. The immediate reaction to link these murders to political rhetoric is just as dangerous as the ignorant rhetoric you describe hearing first hand in your post. There was absolutely no indication that this man had any interest or connection to Sarah Palin or the GOP, in general. Not only that, but history tells us that acts such as these are usually perpetrated by individuals with severe mental problems. But instead of focusing on the common sense, historical angle, this story, within hours of breaking, became all about a map utilizing cross-hairs that someone in Sarah Palin's camp created many months ago - without any evidence that this imagery had anything to do with the attack. Or that the asshole had even seen the map, which I highly doubt.

By making GOP rhetoric the focus of a murder investigation within hours of the horrible tragedy occurring, the morons who created this fire storm only ratcheted up and perpetrated the very rhetoric they were condemning. This debate has been raging for three days now, and there is STILL no evidence that this guy had any ties to the Right. Some say that it's still important we have this debate. Okay, perhaps. But the more important story, to me, is how to fix the mental health laws in this country. Some people need to be committed, whether they agree to it or not.

If all of this fallout occurred because the media couldn't find a sexier angle, than I never want to read another newspaper or watch another news program again.

 

But not to be outdone, the Tea Party Express is claiming that Loughner was a, liberal, because he, gasp, " admired the Communist Manifesto and burned the American flag."

http://tinyurl.com/4egozb9

He also listed Ayn Rand's book "We the Living" as one of his favourite books.

Would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous.

 

That's just asinine.

And the more folks on the whack-job right get their boxers in a bunch, the more he's proven to have been correct.

 

It isn't the first time she's been blamed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/sarah-palin/3405336/Sarah-Palin-blamed-by-the-US-Secret-Service-for-death-threats-against-Barack-Obama.html

 

You touched upon something that really seems to be more of the root cause than lack of rock solid gun control laws- mental health. That is the discussion that cable news networks should be having. From kindergarten on every school system has kids who are social outcasts. As they get older they move farther away from society's ability to bring them into the tent.

 

I think the tide might be starting to turn on coverage.

Focus seems to be shifting from political rhetoric to mental illness:

http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/a-killers-parents/?hp

I personally feel no anger toward Jared Loughner.

I am horrified by what appears to be his disease.