Finding Someone To Blame

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is in critical condition, many others are wounded and five or six are dead. A gunman began shooting yesterday and caused mayhem in Tuscon. Almost immediately a concerted effort from the left was made to place the blame for this tragedy and the fingers were pointed at the Tea Party, the right wing, and Sarah Palin. This was all coordinated and planned and it is inaccurate,

The left needs someone to blame and they love to pin violence on the Tea party and others even though these groups have not done anything violent (all the violence has been from the left). The website Daily Kos congratulated Sarah Palin for a job well done and displayed the map she used that had bulls eyes on seats that were targeted. While the little weasel at Kos was doing this he scrubbed a post where Giffords was dead to a constituent and failed to mention that he himself had put Giffords on a targeted list of Democrats who were not liberal enough.

The Democrats and its media wing ignored the reports of the shooter being left-wing and listing the Communist Manifesto as his favorite reading material. That would make him a left wing nut, not a right wing one.

I do not believe Kos or anyone else is responsible for what happened. I only point out their actions to show that if we are to believe the claims of talk causing the problem then these people are guilty of the same kind of talk. Therefore, they are as guilty as those they blame.

And if we want to carry it further then Barack Obama is just as much to blame because he is the one who labeled Americans as enemies and urged violence on behalf of his campaign and agenda. We bring a gun, he said. Get in their faces he said. Looks like the whack job who did this brought a gun and got in her face. He is as guilty as anyone else.

That is, if we are laying blame on anyone other than the lunatic who did this.

You see, I know that the only person who is responsible for this tragedy is Jared Loughner. He and he alone is responsible for what happened and he should be prosecuted and, if he is found guilty, executed for his crime. But the absolute truth of the matter is, he is responsible for what took place.

Not Sarah Palin, not Kos, not the right or left wing but Jared Loughner.

And it would be helpful to the political discourse if the politicians, the pundits and the media stopped trying to lay blame on anyone but Loughner.

Congresswoman Giffords and all those affected by this horrible tragedy are in my prayers. They deserve all of our prayers and not this senseless and unfounded finger pointing.

Sources:
Washington Post
Guardian UK
WND
The Other McCain: From DHS memo in case; * suspect’s mother works for the Pima County Board of Supervisors * the suspect has multiple arrests … But no criminal record? Intervention by someone?

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

66 Responses to “Finding Someone To Blame”

  1. Adam says:

    Not Sarah Palin, not Kos, not the right or left wing but Jared Loughner? Had this been a Muslim would you say it wasn’t Islam either? Probably not.

    I don’t blame Palin but let me remind you that those weren’t bullseyes on her map. They were crosshairs. For some reason your side is quick to cover and revise history for her in minor ways like this.

    As far as the guy being left wing: You only list the Communist Manifesto as his favorite book but you leave off the part about Mein Kampf being on the list as well. I would hardly call this guy left-wing when his reading list includes right wing nonsense and half of his known views involve anti-government conspiracy and talk of gold currency common to your side of things.

    Your point? He was just a lunatic but if you could blame one side it would be the left. My point? He was just a lunatic and a moron.

    • Big Dog says:

      No, and that is your effing problem. You can’t see reality. I am not blaming it on anyone and pointed that out jackass. I made it clear to anyone with a brain. If he was a Muslim and did exactly what this guy did I would think the same thing so DO NOT assume you know what I think. You are not qualified to do that.

      What right wing books asshole?

      Mein Kampf was a written by a Socialist and not right wing. And she was a Jew and I did not call him an anti Semite (so that blows your idea). He posted that he wanted to kill cops (your side) and he was known to those who knew him as left wing (dope smoker your side) so perhaps it is you who are trying to rewrite history.

      My entire point was that you could blame it one anyone if you tried. I made it clear that he and he alone was to blame and that I blame it on only him.

      You, in your dim witted moronic stupidity had to attempt to paint me with the brush of those suck wads at Kos and in the media.

      Try using some honesty at some point. And don’t ever presume you have the ability to think for me or to know what I am thinking.

      And I said Bulls eyes, big effing deal. They were targets, so what? That is not rewriting history, it is merely misstating what they were so do not jump to conclusions dumb ass.

      It was not a matter of covering for her. And when discussing bulls eyes I even mentioned that Kos used targeted as well. So no attempt to hide anything. If you are interested in trying to see who is hiding stuff or covering you look at Kos and if you want to know who is inciting violence you look at the likes of Obama.

      If you want to know who is responsible for this look at the moron who did it.

      But quit acting like saying a House or Senate seat being targeted is language to incite violence. WE HAVE BEEN USING THAT KIND OF TALK FOR A VERY LONG TIME.

    • Big Dog says:

      And were those actually crosshairs or were they surveyors marks? Not that I care because targeting a political seat is not violence but the marks look like surveyor’s marks to me and not crosshairs (having actually seen crosshairs). Here is an example in this post about your friends in the Socialist party.

    • Big Dog says:

      Palin, you bad girl for using cross hairs. Democrats would never use military imagery for their political gain.

      My God, I think they said targeting.

      • Darrel says:

        “…these are bulls-eyes instead of gun-sights, and the targets are states not individual congressmen…” –your link

        • Blake says:

          And the difference, Darrel? Really?
          How many angels dance on the head of a pin, Darrel? THAT’S the type of argument you come to the table with?
          For eons, political parties-both sides- have “targeted” districts, had political “wars”, and political “warrooms”, “sttrategy” sessions, and ANY number of war-like metaphors (that IS what they are- can you say metaphor? Thought you could).
          And, as BD says, they could be surveyor’s marks- if you are going to post here, at least be intelligent about it- otherwise you are just wasting my time.

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: “as BD says, they could be surveyor’s marks”>>

          How embarrassing.

          1) Palin referred to them as “bullseyes.” She should know, it’s her map.

          2) This inappropriate targeting with gunsights was drawn to her attention months before, *by* Mrs. Giffords (and others):

          “I mean, people don’t — they really need to realize that the rhetoric and firing people up and, you know, even things, for example, we’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list. But the thing is that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gunsight over our district.
          When people do that, they’ve gotta realize there’s consequences to that action.”
          LINK.

          3) Palin scrubbed her site immediately. She knew she had been busted.

          And instead of any acknowledgement what do we get? Unbelievable lines of BS about “surveyors symbols.”

    • Big Dog says:

      But then again, when it is a Muslim acting on his radical religion I will be happy to point that out. Nadal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, was a radical who shouted alley akbar while shooting soldiers. He acted in the name of Islam. He was crazy but he was also a radical Muslim who killed in the name of his religion.

      Since this left wing shooter was an atheist I am sure he did not shoot in the name of God and was inspired by his mental illness.

    • Eoj Trahneir says:

      Excuse me but Hitler was a progressive, not a conservative.
      Conservatives use old tried-and-true ways, and progressives try new outlandish un-proven ways.
      Hence, no matter what you say, Hitler, by his actions, was a progressive.

      BD is right; conservatives don’t murder people. If they do, they are, by force of their action NOT a conservative!
      Conservative, progressive, whatever you want, they are identifiers, handles, and they are there because one is what he is.

      A gay can’t say he is straight and still plunge down the Hersey Highway. (and I say that just to PISS YOU OFF! ;-} knowing how you are such an overt and smart gay guy)

      And a guy can’t shot (relatively) innocent people and still be referred to as conservative. Once they cross that line, they become progressive; trying to change the course of events by progressing into un-tried territory.
      And least for him, untried. I hope that liberal progressive fries in hell, we can use the heat!

      Global warming; the results of liberals burning in hell.

  2. victoria says:

    Remember when no one was supposed to jump to any conclusions about the Fort Hood Shooter…

    • Eoj Trahneir says:

      There is a world of difference when a man kills because of his religion and when a man who is religious kills.
      If a man is a vegan, and kills, I doubt the lack of carnality vitamin has anything to do with it.
      But when a vegan kills saying, “Die! You meat eating abomination! Feel! (stab!) the pain! (stab stab!) that animals feel as you die! (hack, stab, stab)” then you can be sure vegan-ism had a large part to play.

      Now, simply substitute Islam for Vegan and you will understand the difference. Christians kill. They have been known to murder.
      But not because the Christian God says, “Go forth and Kill everyone else!” like Islam’s MooHa-mud does.

  3. […] Big Dogs House » Blog Archive » Finding Someone To Blame […]

  4. Darrel says:

    “the Tea party and others… groups have not done anything violent (all the violence has been from the left).”

    Oops:

    http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/guns-democracy-and-freedom/insurrection-timeline

    • Eoj Trahneir says:

      And your point? Need I say it again? If they take the law into their own hands, they have left the conservative camp. They leap, weapon in hand, into the ranks of liberal progressive. By force of their actions is their title determined, and murder makes one a progressive liberal.
      End of discussion.
      Oh, BD!
      BD! Hey! BD!
      Is Darrel real, too?

      • Darrel says:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman

        “No true Scotsman is an intentional logical fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion.”

        Best to avoid logical fallacies when making your points.

        Hey BD, you said: “all the violence has been from the left.”

        I gave you dozens if not a hundred counter examples showing your claim is false. Let’s see your list in support of your claim.

        • Big Dog says:

          I saw no examples of Tea party people. I saw nothing of Sarah Palindrome committing violence. I did see speculation based on talk like we have them surrounded. I did not notice you quoting violent talk from Obama.

          I see a few deranged people like the guy in AZ. So show me where these Tea party people are committing the violence.

        • Darrel says:

          I gave you 113 counter examples from within the last two and a half years showing your claim, “all the violence has been from the left,” is false.

          Your claim can’t be salvaged but let’s see your list showing similar “violence from the left,” in a comparable timespan.

          D.
          ————–
          “Two years before the Tucson massacre, the Department of Homeland Security warned in a report that right wing extremism was on the rise and could prompt “lone wolves” to launch attacks. But the agency backed away from the report amid intense criticism from Republicans, including future House Speaker John Boehner.
          The report, which warned that the crippled economy and the election of the first black president were “unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment,” described the rise of “lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology [as] the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States.”

          http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2815/

        • Eoj Trahneir says:

          Who said anything about the Scotsman fallacy? Just you.
          My assertion isn’t unreasonable, especially because we now know the shooter was a liberal lunatic!
          Take your Scotsman out for a drink, dude.

          Being conservative means being elite. We DON’T accept just everyone. And being a shooter is grounds to be kicked from the club.

          Hence, any person you may care to name may CLAIM to be a conservative, swear he is one, but the fact is, by force of his actions, he isn’t.

          Just like a gay (this is for Adam, considering his latent proclivity) can’t claim to be a straight. He is what he is.

          Shooter are not conservative. That word “conservative” has a meaning and murder isn’t part of it.

          Now, do you understand?

        • Darrel says:

          EOJ: “Who said anything about the Scotsman fallacy?”>>

          You committed No True Scotsman fallacy, an intentional logical fallacy. Best to avoid logical fallacies when making your points.

          Hint (in case you are as thick as you appear to be): You substituted “conservative” for “Scotsman.”

        • Eoj Trahneir says:

          Only in your imagination, boy. When the shoe fits, Scotsmen can’t wear it.

  5. Ogre says:

    I think what bothers me most about this event is the news coverage. People get shot every day in this country and all over the world. But the media acts like it’s the biggest news this century that a Congresswoman got shot — like she’s more important than the mother who got shot in a drug drive-by last night.

    Oh, but don’t worry, I’m sure that this will be used by the government to restrict even more freedoms. I’m just glad it didn’t happen in DC — they’d just make DC a peon-free zone and only allow Congressmen and staffers.

    One other note — once again, the gun didn’t cause killing. Instead, if one person had been armed in the crowd, it is more likely that LESS people would have died.

    • victoria says:

      Never let a good crisis go to waste.

    • Blake says:

      Actually, one other person WAS armed in that crowd- one of the two men who took down the shooter.
      He says he was prepared to pull his own weapon, when he saw that the shooter’s gun was locked with the slide back, indicating that his pistol was out of ammo- a liberal socialist wouldn’t know THAT, as most are too scared of guns.
      Point being, when this other gun carrier saw that there was no need to shoot- he did not- but he did save others by tackling this deranged lunatic.
      As for this lunatic, he was all over the place in his thinking, and not too bright either, which is a tipoff, like the Communist Manifesto, that he was probably leaning to the left, if any direction at all. It is sooooooo hard to try to pin down the philosophies of the insane, don’t you agree?

      • Darrel says:

        “It is sooooooo hard to try to pin down the philosophies of the insane, don’t you agree?”>>

        Yes, but I think Adam does a really good job.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: “a liberal socialist wouldn’t know THAT, as most are too scared of guns.”>>

        Here is what the lady, who actually grabbed the second magazine from the shooter before he could reload, said:

        “SHEP SMITH: If there’s anything you can think of over the last day and a a half that you might be able to turn this into a positive?…

        PATRICIA MAISCH: I don’t think so…I think…mmm…that Sheriff Dupnik said it best, that the extreme right, reporters, radio and TV have added to this problem, and I’m just hoping that that will change because of this. That’s my hope, is that the Republicans will stop naming bills in very hateful things like the “job-killing” whatever the rest of that bill is. I think they’ve just gone over the top. I think the extreme right has gone too far.”

        Link

        • Big Dog says:

          So did she mention the sheriff is a moron? Any indication that what these people speculate is true? Of course not! Let a Muslim kill people and we cannot draw conclusions. Let a left wing lunatic do it and you draw conclusions and say he was right wing.

          The left has targeted seats and people. Look at that pussy Kos and his tough talk. I don’t mind the rhetoric just don’t blame your lunatics on the right. No one made this guy do what he did but if you insist that it is the rhetoric then look in the mirror because your side has just as much of it.

        • Darrel says:

          So you’ve gone from:

          “all the violence has been from the left,”

          to:

          “your side has just as much of it.”

          Want to attempt to show that the left has just as much as this?

          • Big Dog says:

            You provided nothing more than a list of people who have expressed opinions with a few smatterings of actual violent acts. Who cares what someone said? The postfix about the author’s perceptions of people. Beck is non violent and constantly asks for non violence. You have a list of people who express their beliefs. There are not 113 incidents of violence.

            This attributes beliefs to the right from people who are not right wing.

            It is a poor attempt at discrediting people based upon beliefs.

            Show me where these Tea party folks have caused violence. Show me where they are shooting at members of Congress.

            The left is manufacturing BS to push an agenda.

            Your list has the report released by DHS which classifies people as radical if they oppose abortion.

            Even you are not that sloppy.

        • Darrel says:

          Still don’t have a *single* example eh? Can’t you find a liberal that threw a brick somewhere or something? So, let’s throw away 90% of them your right wing rogues and tighten it up to just 18 of the really bad ones.

          What’ve you got?

          BD: “Beck is non violent and constantly asks for non violence.”

          The record shows otherwise. “Glenn Beck frequently spews violent rhetoric on Fox News.”

          Beck’s long history of violent rhetoric.

          And a bonus:

          Beck’s photo fail.

          • Big Dog says:

            Of course we know tat Media Matters is a Soros organization that takes things out of context.

            Regardless, talk did not kill those people. Talk did not wound those people. If talk caused violence I would have shot people a long time ago but it does not. You fail to realize it was a nut.

            Beck calls for non violence. That is his shtick. I am all for violence and will readily bring it when it is warranted.However, you make claims of people who express thoughts, those guaranteed under our First Amendment and say it is violence. TALK IS NOT VIOLENT.

            As for acts committed, hell you can find plenty of them. Plenty of liberals have broken windows and slashed tires. You know it but your unwillingness to admit it demonstrates that you are not a freethinker in search of the truth and only the truth. You betray those freethinkers by engaging in dishonest rhetoric.

            That has been your MO all along.

            But I know that I am on to something because it drives the likes of you and Adam nuts and that means I hit the sweet spot.

        • Eoj Trahneir says:

          Photo fail? Photo fail? Because he didn’t please you? Would you rather a photo of him hugging some dude?
          You are a sad man. Sad sad sad.

        • Blake says:

          As I said before, the Sheriff had a liberal agenda and was speaking without knowing the facts- something even he should have known better than to do.
          Is there heated rhetoric coming from both sides? yes- did it contribute to this unhinged nutjob’s violent acts? NO.
          The Sheriff was way off base, but “Never let a crisis go to waste” is not a right-wing mantra, but an opportunity for the left to begin spewing lie after lie, true to Goebbel’s philosophy- Tell a lie big enough, and often enough, and some people will begin to believe it.

        • Darrel says:

          So let’s review Bigd’s retreat. BigD goes from:

          “all the violence has been from the left,”

          to:

          “your side has just as much of it.”

          That’s a 50% reduction and going in the right direction but obviously way way off.

          When I give him dozens of specific and well known examples of his rightwingers shooting people in church, committing slaughter and just generally slaying people left and right, can Bigd even find a *single* example of such behavior on the left? Anything? No, instead we get this made up smear:

          “Plenty of liberals have broken windows and slashed tires.”

          Wow. This is some good stuff.

      • victoria says:

        Amazing–what about making a whole movie dipicting the assasination of then sitting President Bush–and also thinking that this in anyway is going to stop a madman in the future.

      • Big Dog says:

        What makes them special? It is already against the law to threaten people. Never let a crisis go to waste!

      • Eoj Trahneir says:

        True; if there is incitement to cause harm, we need to look at Moore and his “documentaries.” Just watching him makes me want to kill a fat white dude.

  6. victoria says:

    You know what gets me is that just like the Virginia Tech shooter, this guy was throwing up all sorts of red flags that he was disturbed for a long time and yet he got a gun and no one around him in college or at home or in the community did anything at all. And this all has its origination in political correctness. God forbid you say or do anything to a mentally ill person who may be a danger to himself or to others. And this sheriff who is pointing fingers at the right instead of himself maybe or other law enforcement who might have been able to do something about a mentally disturbed person aquiring a gun and then using it.

    • Eoj Trahneir says:

      Victoria! You are so good to find this.
      Darrel! Adam!
      You are both on my F.I.L.P. list!
      You spouted on this post a dozen times, MORE! “Show us who is a liberal and wants to inspire hate and death!”
      Victoria did it, and she did it sooooo well.

      All I hear from you both is silence. Whats the matter?
      She slammed you so hard, I bet your parents get bruises!

      Man, she gave you the perfect slap-down! The one-two punch! Don’t you feel stupid, being a liberal and all, now?
      It was lovely, and I enjoyed every word of her knocking the stuffing’s from you BOTH!

      Yeah, Malkin helped. Malkin is solid gold, she is like a wooden stake through your vampire hearts, isn’t she! You two virtually exploded!

      Oh, I laugh! I laugh at you wimpy, subservient liberal stool-sample pigeons! Cluck cluck fly away and cry!
      F.I.W.L.P. s!

      Oh, Victoria! You made my DECADE!

    • Darrel says:

      VIC: “Michellemalkin stuff”

      No comparison whatsoever.

      People protesting write outrageousness things on their signs. This happens on both sides but mostly *yours* (including most of the spelling mistakes). This is the rank and file playing with their free speech rights and is to be expected. This is *completely* different than elected officials and spokespersons for political parties and TV/radio pundits with millions of listeners inappropriately targeting elected officials with violent rhetoric.

      No, comparison whatsoever.

  7. victoria says:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/10/did-dupnik-miss-the-red-flags-on-loughner/
    Remember what I said–here is a post from Allahpundit over at Hotair.

  8. Big Dog says:

    They are surveyors marks that are called crosshairs. However, she used them as crosshairs and that is fine. You, the supposed freethinker, fail to see the truth that both sides have done this, they have called it targeting and they have used bullseyes on maps (which are targets for the uninformed). It has been part of politics forever.

    I guess since we call them battleground states and Clinton had a war room which allowed him to use the money in his war chest to run a campaign.

    Or is that not the same?

    • Darrel says:

      It’s not the same. The only equivalent to using gun sights to target individual members of congress, is using gun sights to target individual members of congress. Bullseyes over states is entirely appropriate. Palin was warned, directly, by several from both sides of the aisle, including by the woman eventually shot in the head, that this was inappropriate.

      In politics you take your chances and live with the results. Palin got busted. If she was a decent person she wouldn’t have done this in the first place. If she was a half way decent person she would come forward and admit it was a mistake rather than sending surrogates forward to tell astonishing lies about “surveyor symbols.”

      You guys should be happy. Palin was nothing but a huge albatross for your side. Look at the trajectory of favorability ratings. She excites the wankers on the fringe but was in no way electable to high office. And with good reason.

  9. Big Dog says:

    Darrell, you gave examples of what exactly? Were they right wing like the guy in Arizona? If so you got nothing. And yes, I have pointed out plenty of times the left has done this. It was a lefty that killed Kennedy. It was a lefty that bit off a man’s finger. It was a lefty that shot Lennon. It was a lefty that shot Reagan.

    You gave examples of nothing.

    I know we are hitting the correct nerves when you come back to cut and paste and quote Soros websites.

    But you are free to leave again.

    • Eoj Trahneir says:

      He has already forgotten he was getting whipped. That’s why their motto is, “Move On.”

      • Darrel says:

        Hey dumb dumb. Here is a years worth of archived Doggy roast and toast. Enjoy.

        My motto is roast to a crisp and then move on to the next bit. You won’t see much of it since you have chosen to make yourself irrelevant.

        • Big Dog says:

          Darrel, I just read how you do not trust me and how you tried to make your penis larger by smearing me at your circle jerk site.

          You have now been banned.

          I have not censored you and I have never changed your comments nor deleted them but after you admit that you claim not to trust me to continue to do so so you had to archive them.

          So, you can go where you trust people and you do not have to worry about coming back.

        • Big Dog says:

          You have made yourself irrelevant. Roast to a crisp. More like cut and paste and take things out of context as a partisan hack while pretending to be a free thinker. More like a free stinker.

          But now you are gone.

          My motto, piss me off and I eliminate you and nothing pisses me off more than having my integrity questioned particularly by those who have little themselves. You have the distinction of being the first person ever banned from here.

    • Darrel says:

      BD: “Darrell, you gave examples of what exactly?

      Stop being obtuse. I gave 18 specific and recent examples of your side going on rampages and committing and trying to commit mass murder.

      LINK again.

      If you are referring to examples regarding Beck, I gave dozens of specific and referenced examples of:

      Glenn Beck’s long history of violent rhetoric.

      BD: Were they right wing like the guy in Arizona?”>>

      The details of their unquestionable rightwing credentials are given at the link provided.

      BD: I have pointed out plenty of times the left has done this.”>>

      You said “all the violence has been from the left.” I gave you 18 fresh and stunning instances of mass violence from your side (with another 100 examples set aside). You’ve got bupkis!

      BD: It was a lefty that killed Kennedy.”

      LOL! I was wondering if you might have to go back to before I was born. What revealing desperation! All of my examples are from the last 2.5 years.

      BD: It was a lefty that bit off a man’s finger.”

      Unreferenced assertion (and lame).That sounds bad. I hope he got it looked at.

      BD: It was a lefty that shot Lennon.”

      Mere assertion (lame and outdated too). I don’t see a drop of evidence Mark David Chapman had any political motivations.

      BD: It was a lefty that shot Reagan.”

      Let’s check:

      “Hinckley’s supposed motivation behind the attack stemmed from an obsession with actress Jodie Foster due to erotomania.” –wiki

      Nope. Nice try. Pathetic actually.

      BD: cut and paste and quote Soros websites.”>>

      Genetic fallacy. If you ever find I quote something from Media Matters that you can refute, please do so. Their research is impeccable and devastating to your positions. That’s why you hate them so.

  10. Ogre says:

    Darrel: “When I give him dozens of specific and well known examples of his rightwingers shooting people in church, committing slaughter and just generally slaying people left and right, can Bigd even find a *single* example of such behavior on the left? Anything? No.”

    Wow, really? Sadly, I bet you really believe that no one on the left ever once committed political violence. Wow.

    • Darrel says:

      No, I am rather sure they have. But if the situation is comparable (and Bigd claims it isn’t since “all the violence has been from the left.”), you shouldn’t have any trouble whatsoever in providing carefully referenced, comparable, examples from within a similar time frame.

      That you can’t do this, is very telling.

      Was the guy who shot Lincoln a lefty? Might check that out.

      • Ogre says:

        Classic internet troll: You’re wrong, I’m right. I have links to prove I’m right, and any links you provide are lies.

        Clearly no point in explaining truth and reality to you, but then, of course, as a “free thinker,” I’m sure you reality is whatever you think it is.

        Open your mind, you might be surprised at what’s out here.

      • Big Dog says:

        Ws the guy who shot Lincoln influenced by Palin or Limbaugh?

        Seems that violence has been around for a long time and long before the mass media could put out targets on maps.

        Then again, you could blame it on Bush.

  11. Big Dog says:

    In the free thinker world, cross hairs are bad and targets are OK. In the liberal world it is OK for a politician to say another should be lined up against the wall and shot as long as that politician is a lefty.

    Can’t have a map of targeted seats or it incites violence.

    Bullsh*t.

    If political rhetoric caused violence then people would have been killing each other every day when Bush was president because the left was absolutely VILE.