Sunday, January 09, 2011

US nuttery

Watching the film "The US vs John Lennon" last night" (not really our usual style, but it was Now Cheap on iTunes) it became more apparent to me than it was previously, that the US has had a surfeit of rabid violent nutters for a very long time indeed. Of course there is little motivation for the politicians to attempt to tame them, because they serve a useful purpose in enabling intimidation and even assassination by proxy. Not that the politicians are necessarily above the latter all the time anyway, but it's obviously more convenient and much cleaner if the trigger is pulled by some delusional nutcase rather than a directly paid operative.

And then this morning's news, of course, which is why a random cynical thought has actually turned into a blog post. Oh, I updated Sarah Palin's poster for her (original spotted on PZ Myers)


Carl C said...

It's pretty depressing. I think I'd move back to the UK if the Conservatives would let me. I think the gun-nut & modern anti-gov't psychosis is quite well represented by the fact that the poor little girl killed in Arizona, was born in September 11th, 2001 and featured in a glurgy book "Faces of Hope: Babies Born on 9/11."

Some hope...a bunch of hicks getting fired up and psychotically violent over (a) moderate healthcare reform and (b) Mexicans crossing their border (which we all stole in 1848 anyway)....

Marco said...

Amazingly, the word is that Giffords will survive, doctors are quite positive even.

Jesse Kelly, Giffords Republican opponent in the Arizona elections, IMHO, did something even worse than Palin:

Anonymous said...

James, you struck a very low blow. At a time of such tragedy and grieving families you conflation of this incident with Palin is reprehensible. By the way did you see that the deranged shooters favorite writings were Mein Kamph and the communist manifesto.

Anonymous said...

"By the way did you see that the deranged shooters favorite writings were Mein Kamph and the communist manifesto"

I'm sure anonymous1 meant to say that Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto were "among the deranged shooter's favorite writings, alongside Alice in Wonderland, the Wizard of Oz, the Phantom Toll Booth, and 16 other books."

Having said that, and agreeing that Sarah Palin's original ad and Jesse Kelly's campaign event were in astoundingly poor taste that should have lead to their marginalization as serious political figures, I still find the updating of Palin's poster to also be in poor taste. A link to it with the note "perhaps this kind of ad is not the best idea?" would have been sufficient...


Carl C said...

The shame is purely America's and the 24/7 media spin cycle that turns mundane political issues into violent "end times" BS. James was parodying what many on the right have been wishing for with that "Palin map" -- and crying crocodile tears of outrage over it is absurd.

Rattus Norvegicus said...

Also amongst his favorites was the obligatory Ayn Rand screed "We the Living".

James Annan said...

I don't think Palin is uniquely evil or responsible for the attack. But she certainly contributes more than her fair share to the culture. "Don't retreat, reload."

Tom C said...

James -

Ronald Reagan was shot by a nut. Nobody made it a political issue. Gerald Ford was shot by an environmental extremist. Nobody blamed environmentalism.

More recently, liberals got together in tony salons and shared assassination fantasies concerning Bush. He was routinely burned in effigy at left-sponsored protests. And I believe an artist in the UK gave a show recently featuring paintings of conservative politicians being assassinated.

Palin's use of "crosshairs" rhetoric might have been in bad taste, but until you can provide some actual evidence that the shooter was influenced by it or even by the "political atmosphere" your post is a pathetic smear.

Carl C said...

Reagan was shot by a nut who thought he would impress Jodie Foster. Ford was shot by a Manson family member (Squeaky Fromme). To claim Ms. Fromme was an 'environmental activist' is ludicrous; and shows that you're just intellectually dishonest.

The difference is that today's nuts, especially in ultra-red states like Arizona, are surrounded 24/7 by violent hype from the likes of Limbaugh, Palin, Coulter, Hannity, Beck and 100 other more local nuts on the radio & TV. I mean every day Beck is on the radio & TV screeching that some new minor thing is the latest end-times Apocalyptic fall of civilization and we have to take violently to the streets because it's "Communism in America" if poor people get medical care.

Plus, is it just a coincidence or a random nutter that the ones shot were a Democratic Congresswoman (pretty hard to find a Dem in Arizona), who is a "centre-right Blue Dog Dem"; and a Repubican (George HW Bush appointed) Judge who just isn't "a far-right enough") conservative (i.e. he was receiving death threats for months due to his ruling in favor of Mexicans illegally held by an Arizona rancher). I mean hell you could drop an atomic bomb on Phoenix Arizona and not kill a Democratic Party member; yet a lone nutter can shoot a Dem politician.

And how about the shooting in the church in Tennesse by a right-wing nutjob who wanted to "take out some liberals"; that wasn't politically motivated? (The media sure swept that under the rug).

To tie it all into James & Jules blog a little bit more -- this is the same sort of insane political vitriol we've all seen over global warming. My favorite is Inhofe's line that that "global warming is the greatest scam perpetrated on the American people" (as if the many corporate & banking & Wall Street & Iraq/Afghan war "scams" weren't beyond that etc).

Yet right-wing idiots deny any personal responsibility after the smoke has cleared. Thankfully no scientists have been shot yet; although there have been a bunch of death threats reported (par for the course for the gun-nut Repukes).

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Tom C said...

Carl C -

No I'm not dishonest, I'm well informed and have a memory. Fromme's big concern was preserving the California redwoods, which was a strage reason to shoot at Ford, but the point is that she was a nut so it's not proper to draw political conclusions.

You will remember, or course, that just two weeks later, Ford was shot at by a true blue left wing ideologue. And in the 70s there were hundreds of left-wing bombings in California alone. Do you remember that Carl C?

But this is all rich, really coming from folks who just a couple of months ago shrugged off a commercial, carefully wrought by a team of PR professionals and environmentalists, where young climate skeptics were blown to bloody bits.

No, Carl C, rhetoric about targeting and such is pretty common in political discourse. You really have to reach extreme levels of depravity to picture blowing up little kids who might think there is more to UHI than has been admitted.

Anonymous said...

Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’

The New York Times

"This won’t stop partisans from making hay out of Saturday’s tragedy, of course. The Democratic operative who was quoted in Politico saying that his party needs “to deftly pin this on the Tea Partiers” was just stating the obvious: after a political season rife with overheated rhetoric from conservative “revolutionaries,” the attempted murder of a Democratic congresswoman is a potential gift to liberalism.

But if overheated rhetoric and martial imagery really led inexorably to murder, then both parties would belong in the dock. (It took conservative bloggers about five minutes to come up with Democratic campaign materials that employed targets and crosshairs against Republican politicians.) When our politicians and media loudmouths act like fools and zealots, they should be held responsible for being fools and zealots. They shouldn’t be held responsible for the darkness that always waits to swallow up the unstable and the lost."

Anonymous said...

Anger over Halloween display of Palin with noose

ok, I'll stop now, even tho there are much more data to indicate that the Blog's owner is out of touch with news in the USA. That's understandable, because he's not there.

Anonymous said...

Digging deeper with the bottom not yet in sight.

Unbelievable: Democrat Group Using Gifford’s Shooting For Fundraiser!

From the comments:
** Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”
** Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
** Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
** Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
** Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“
** Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
** Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
** Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”
** Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”

Nick Dearth said...

Looking at the comments I'd say the title is quite apt. How quickly it devolved into a Googling contest for who can find the most out-of-context quotes. I hear that's also how the "Everyone was predicting we're all gonna die from global cooling in the 70s" meme was proven to be true.

Anonymous said...

I have, from several anecdotal sources, seen reports that death threats have been much more prevalent recently than they were in the past couple decades, and mainly against democratic and liberal targets. If this is true, that would indicate that there is, indeed, a difference between the current political discourse and past political discourse.

I don't have hard statistics though: a number of newspaper articles cite a 400% increase of threats against Obama compared to George W, but I've also seen citations that the Secret Service and FBI specifically don't release information on threat statistics against politicians. I know that there have been a death threats against climate scientists and environmental officials. Obviously, anti-abortion activists have been linked to violence a number of times.

There have been a number of incidents of anti-government violence recently (cf, plane vs. IRS, letter bombs in Maryland offices last week, window-shootings post-health care, etc.). Again, mostly seemingly against liberal targets, though that may be confirmation bias on my part.

I'd appreciate pointers to better statistics on these, but it is certainly my impression that the Palins/Becks/Limbaughs of the world have done a good job of raising the level of violence in political discourse, which may, at the edges, increase the level of actual violence too. Hard to attribute any given incident to a specific piece of language (much like attributing a specific flood to increased precip driven by warming), but if there is indeed a growing level of threats and minor violence, then that is fairly suggestive.


(presumably back in the days of the Black Panthers, Weathermen, and Earth Firsters, there was more "leftist" violence, but it seems pretty dominated by the "right" these days)

Carl C said...

I found this from the Sheriff in Arizona on the case -- I'd hardly guess he's a left-wing liberal Sheriff? He pretty much says the same things I've pointed out -- the insane vitriolic rhetoric and death threats all from the right-wing Beck/Palin crowd.

""When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous," said the sheriff. "And unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

Anonymous said...

More history

The Hateful Left: Where incendiary political rhetoric truly resides in America

Flashback: How Clinton exploited Oklahoma City for political gain

Morris began polling about Oklahoma City almost immediately after the bombing. On April 23, four days after the attack, Clinton appeared to point the finger straight at his political opponents during a speech in Minneapolis. "We hear so many loud and angry voices in America today whose sole goal seems to be to try to keep some people as paranoid as possible and the rest of us all torn up and upset with each other," he said. "They spread hate. They leave the impression that, by their very words, that violence is acceptable."

At a White House meeting four days later, on April 27, Morris presented Clinton with a comeback strategy based on his polling. Morris prepared an extensive agenda for the session, a copy of which he would include in the paperback version of his memoir, Behind the Oval Office. This is how the April 27 agenda began:

Carl C said...

more lame attempts to google right-wing websites as "proof" that the violence is on the left. Conservatives are just mentally unstable and hypocritically cannot take any personal responsibility. I see now there's a right-wing two-minute-hatefest going on versus the Arizona Sheriff who pointed out all the insanity from the right-wing hate speech leading up to this shooting!

You idiots are as bad with history as you are with climate science!

Tom C said...

Carl C -

You have proven your ability to name call, now how about some evidence that supports the connection you claim? It is not appropriate to label this nut's views as driven by any politicl ideology, but what evidence there is at this point would put him on the left.

How about some comments on the enviro "blow skeptic children to bits" commercial?

Anonymous said...

Carl C,

Do you mean this bad history?

A People's History Of The United States by Howard Zinn

I note that you have not yet produced any data, not even a single bit, to support your position-of-authority statements.

Make stuff up and repeat it often and loud doesn't cut it any more. The days of 2000 and 2004 are over and gone and will never return.

Carl C said...

jeez, you right-wing nutjobs poison every well you see don't you? it's amazing to see the right-wing haters who usually are poisoning Myers page are now here!

yeah, there may be a few idiots that put a Palin effigy in a noose etc. But compare to the actual people in power on the Repug side of things who use hateful & violent rhetoric and "code words" daily. And look at the violent history in the US and you'll see it mirrors 1930's right-wing corporate-backed fascism in Germany, Italy, and Spain.

So it's just a coincidence that judge who backed Mexicans illegally held by an Arizona rancher, and whom had 100's of deaths threats, was shot the other day? That one of the only Democratic voices in Arizona was shot? That right-wing militia-gun-nuts such as Tim McVeigh blew up OKC?

We don't have as much to fear from the Muslim terrorist boogeyman as we do from our own home-grown right-wing nutjobs who think Social Security & welfare is an evil government plot....

DirkD said...

Do any of you here currently live in Arizona, by any chance? Is that the crickets chirping I hear?

I've been working in Phoenix for the past three election cycles. I've seen, firsthand, the degeneration of political rhetoric in this state -- from J.D. Hayworth and Ben Quayle here to the Tea Party crap spouted by Jesse Kelly down in the old Pueblo over the last elections, for instance.

Much, much more of the TV/Radio/print ads that have this discourse of violence comes from the Right - I did not see, hear or read such dicourse from ads by Harry Mitchell, Ann Kirkpatrick or Gabby Giffords - the three AZ House members targetted by Palin.

I've heard in the checkout aisles - ironically enough at my local Bashas/Fry's/Safeway, or in other social settings here - jokes about how "the wrong liberal was shot" on Saturday afternoon, or how the "Don't Tread on Me/NOBamacare" attitude was "the way to go" during last November's elections, or how it's only a matter of time that "something" happens to Obama after 2008.

Couple this with our very lax local gun and ammo laws, and with you have a ticking time bomb.

So forgive me if I opine that you are joking if you seriously think that the culture of violence in today's media world had no impact in this, especially here in AZ.

The bottom line is this - Sheriff Dupnik is right. The discourse today needs to be dialed down. If a blowhard like Olbermann can stand up to the plate and take responsibility for his words, I don't see why Beck, Limbaugh et al. can't do the same.

Disagree? Come and stay here if you think you're hard enough.

Tom C said...

My, my, this is entertaining. Carl C "would like to go back to the UK, but the Conservatives won't let him". Feeling a bit paranoid, Carl? He is also of the opinion that 1930s German fascism was the fault of "corporations".

Carl C - If someone were to read my and your posts in this thread, by rhetoric alone, who would be judged the potentially violent one?

Meanwhile, our esteemed host, who started this with a low-blow post, is studying documentaries about how the "US" pinched John Lennon. That's right, we hateful right-wingers were out to get Lennon and, by God, we did. BTW, James, "Imagine" is a really deep song, eh?

And PZ Myers - there is a model of civility.

Carl C said...

I think Dirk & the Arizona sheriff said it all about the Arizona & right-wing gun nutter insanity.

And yes, Tom C, the right-wing nutjobs in the FBI (J. Edgar Hoover) really did have it in for Lennon as any cursory glance at the FBI files would indicate. At the time i.e. when Lennon was claiming his phones were tapped etc, you idiots were saying "Lennon is delusional." But it turns out he was correct.

And yes the 30's right-wing fascist movements in Germany & Italy & Spain were with the support of the corporations and often with the blessing of the Catholic church. This is just basic history.

Steve Reynolds said...

I liked Glenn Reynolds' (no relation) take on this:

"To be clear, if you're using this event to criticize the "rhetoric" of Mrs. Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you're either: (a) asserting a connection between the "rhetoric" and the shooting, which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b) you're not, in which case you're just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. Which is it?"

Carl C said...

Wow, what a lame false dichotomy Reynolds presents. I just took a look at his site - his current touted like is the bogus meme that Palin's map is "not crosshairs - but surveyor's marks." Yeah right, as it really ties into that whole Palin mythology of her being a Mama Surveyor etc. And "don't retreat, reload" is obviously in reference to land surveying on her Alaska estate (to presumably get a better view of Russia).

Carl C said...

and of course the sponsor-du-jour of Reynolds' Instapundit is Front Sight Firearms Training. No doubt for better targetting of the "evil commies in your midst"

Tom C said...

So Carl C, you are claiming that it was the government that killed John Lennon and it was pinned on Chapman? Maybe JD Salinger was in on it too? Exactly who here is the paranoid nut?

And the Catholic church brought Hitler to power. Is Dan Brown your idea of a good historian, Carl?

Not surprising you side-stepped every point I raised, from Sara Jane Moore to the blown-up child climate skeptic commercial. And, we are still waiting for one piece of evidence that the AZ shooter was motivated by conservative politics. So far, what evidence there is shows him to be a lefty to the extent he was political at all.

Carl C said...

err, Tom, you didn't raise any points worthy of debate. What am I supposed to do, debate whether "Imagine" is a good song with you?

Just look at the FBI files of Lennon -- the reich-wingers were after him for ages (Nixon thought he was coming to the US to screw up the '72 RNC convention). What's it like being on the side of assholes like Nixon & Reagan all the time?

And are you still trying to spin Squeaky Fromme of the Manson family as an "environmental activist?" How laughable. Amazing this isn't even in wikipedia -- but I guess they're a leftist org and you only use "conservapedia"?

It's as intellectually dishonest as the reich-wingers spinning Palin's target map as "surveyors symbols." Yeah Sarah Palin -- she put the ordnance in "Ordnance Maps" alright.....

Steve Reynolds said...

Since Carl likes him so much, here is more from Glenn Reynolds:

Lefty: Sarah Palin and the Tea Party movement encourage hatred and violence!

Questioner: How do you know?

Lefty: Because whenever I think about them, I’m filled with hate and a desire to do harm!

Anonymous said...

"blown-up child climate skeptic commercial"

Yeah, that commercial was in pretty poor taste. But while it seems, on the surface, to be comparable to the violent rhetoric of the Palins/Becks/Limbaughs, there is a crucial difference: how many people in the target audience for the commercial send death threats to their favorite coal company CEO, right-wing media giant, or republican official? Compared to how many Palin/Beck/Limbaugh followers send death threats, carry guns to public meetings, break windows, etc. etc? The commercial was, however poorly marketed, meant as black humor. I see the PBL spectrum as much closer to incitement than the commercial.

(Again, I would like better statistics on the above: I can certainly think of one example of a recent liberal violent act - the Discovery Channel hostage taker, but again, that's one anecdotal piece of evidence, and I feel that I have many more anecdotal pieces of evidence on the other side of the ledger. It probably helps that the right-wing is the party of the NRA, so the right-wing crazies are more likely to have and think of resorting to guns than the left-wing crazies)


Tom C said...


Thanks for your reasonable posts on this topic.

The problem is the double standard. The Discovery Channel hostage taker was a wacko who thought he was championing environmental causes. Yet the mainstream media treats him as only a wacko and doesn't go into the environmentalism as "cause" or "incitement". Yet on a much thinner reed of evidence (in fact none at all), the AZ shooter becomes a "Tea party" representative.

My other example, that Carl C can't seem to comprehend, is that Squeaky Fromme, who shot at Ford was also just a nut. But her big cause at the time was saving the redwoods. It is unfair to tar environmentalists with her actions based on this connection.

But poor Carl, if the Conservatives would just let him back to the UK he could explore those Illuminatti connections to the Knights Templar that eventually led to Lennon's assassination. Imagine!

Rattus Norvegicus said...

Err, Tom C, I think that the John Lennon film is about the efforts by the Nixon administration to keep Lennon from becoming a legal resident in this country and the associated deportation proceedings.

Squeaky Fromme was a Manson family member who according to her Wikipedia page (which I trust because she is not a political issue) does not indicate any substantial connection with the environmental movement. Sarah Jane Moore may have had sympathies with the SLA, but that places her somewhat outside of the mainstream of American politics, doesn't it? BTW, Gerald Ford was never shot, although there were 2 assassination attempts. One from a flat out nut and one from someone who may have harbored sympathies for a group very, very far out of the mainstream of American politics.

During the early 1970's the Weather Underground did stage several bombings some of which were aimed at people. There were also instances of violence during antiwar riots, such as the riots in Isla Vista (Santa Barbara), but most of this was aimed at property and not people. Not good and not a happy episode in US history.

I actually bothered to watch a couple of Loughner's videos (and they are disturbing) and he was a hard money fan, hated people who "couldn't speak English" and questioned the legitimacy of the Federal Government. Personally, I don't think that he was influenced by the SarahPac ad. Rather the influence probably came from the ads run by her opponent in the last election. These showed him taking target practice on human targets with the implications being made clear.

Carl C said...

I concur with Rattus. Also, the Obama quote that right-wingers are trotting out as some BS "moral equivalence" i.e. "Obama said bring a gun to a knife-fight" was an obvious joke from a movie quote. Obama was speaking to a crowd in Philly and also immediately after made reference to tough Philly sports fans etc.

Which is where I was obviously coming from with my "I wish the Conservatives would let me back in the UK" joke. I mean really, the likes of Tom C read into some liberal conspiracy in my line & Obama's line?

But there is nothing obviously humorous in the violent rhetoric we see from the Palin & Beck bunch, on down through the insane nutters on local radio that spin every (what should be) mild political topic into "TREASON" & "DON'T TREAD ON ME." Rather than being tough gun-totin' macho men Repugs think they are; they are what Bill Maher rightly calls a bunch of hysterical little girls.

But of course since America is getting so dumb you have to explain every damn joke so nothing is funny any more! It's just amazing that this sort of specialized climate science page has to end up being a bloated political blog because right-wing nutters have to invade every damn website to espouse their idiocy. You idiots are entitled to your own opinion - but you're not entitled to invent the facts, and warping of reality! :-)

James Annan said...

It's pretty obvious that in general the shooter is always a nutter of some sort, and their personal politics aren't always important (though it certainly seems to be a big factor when doctors get murdered). I don't think the left is particularly pure, in fact from the Lennon movie I'd suspect the Black Panthers to be rough equivalents of a different political stripe, er spots, er colour. Not that I remember a lot about the 60s, I was obviously enjoying them too much (or else barely born). But those concerned with matters of taste, I think the time for such hand-wringing is really before a "target" gets "eliminated". AKA a person getting shot in the head (not to mention the bystanders).

Anyway, Anonymous M's comments from 1:58am are probably the closest to my own. There's a difference between a military metaphor and inciting. But please carry on with your arguments...

Tom C said...

Wow Carl - You can really swear a lot! You are soo smart.

One sign of delusional thinking is making jokes that are so "inside" that only the teller gets them, cf. your UK/Conservatives line. Kind of creepy, also, how you end your profanity laced diatribe by calling me an idiot and then adding a smiley face.

It was James who brought his little climate science blog down into the gutter not me. He made a smear and we called him on it. Sorry if that ruins your day.

Rattus - I love the way you whitewash Left crimes. The myriad left-wing bombings were "only against property (which is not true) and this was "not a happy time" for our country. Well, I guess a few bombs here and there is OK if it is not a "happy time". Plus, Ford didn't actually get shot, so it's really no big deal.

Re Lennon - Carl was hyperventilating about the persecution of Lennon and said the gov was "out to get him". I think this deserved mocking, no?

Re Squeaky and Sara Jane, there are courses you can order to improve your reading comprehension. One more time, my point is that it would be unfair to use these two nuts to try to de-ligitimize environmentalism and left wing politics in general, even though there are much stronger ties to these ideologies than there are in the AZ case.

Rattus - your summary of Loughner is highly misleading, it is clear he developed an irrational grudge against her some 3-4 years ago, well before Palin or the last election cycle. And at least two acquaintences describe him as "left-wing".

Tom C said...

One more bleat before off to bed:

Carl and Ratty both accuse me of unfairly tying Squeaky to environmental causes. Apparently if something is not in Wikipedia it doesn't exist. This is absolutely hilarious, since at her trial her lawyer actually used her environmental activism as a . It was just this delicate concern for the environment that should have exonerated her. Look it up somewhere other than Wikipedia guys.

Tom C said...

word missing in last post, sorry - her lawyer used it as a defense.

Carl C said...

my joke at top was an obvious one on the new "Conservative/xenophobic immigration policy."

And again, there is no bona fide evidence you provided about Squeaky/Sara and their "environmental terrorism/activism" re: Gerald Ford attempted shootings. And idiots like you screech ad infinitum about the 60's Weathermen or Black Panthers but turn a blind eye to carpet bombings in Vietnam, collateral damage in Iraq & Afghanistan etc (which is a million to one compared to the Weathermen).

what's pathological is that Tom C sounds just like Bill O'Reilly now (just substitute James for the NY Times)! The reich-wingers get very upset when you point out their violent rhetoric & their hypocrisy.

Anonymous said...

Divide et impera...

Tom C said...

Carl C -

Thanks for amply demonstrating the mental tics asociated with left wing paranoia.

The essence of it is seeing connections between everything that proves the conspiracy. So, John Lennon was wiretapped by the gov and then he got shot. So, the gov had him shot. The judge that got shot in AZ ruled favorably regarding some Mexican immigrants, which just proves that he was shot by a right wing conspiracy. You somehow have devined my opinions about the Vietnam war (wildly incorrect) based on this topic as well. Once again, completely disconnected things that get hooked together to "prove" your conspiracy theory.

Now that I think of it, many parallels to AGW paranoia: every weather event - hot, cold snow, no snow - "proves" global warming and is just what "models predict".

Carl C said...

*yawn* nobody (not James, myself, or the documentary he referenced) said "the government killed John Lennon." He was obviously harassed and targetted by the Nixon admiistration & the FBI/J. Edgar Hoover. And eventually killed by a deranged nutter of the "born again Christian" US perversion errr persuasion.

You made all sorts of claims about Ford's potential assassins i.e. they were "left wing environmental activists" yet provided no evidence to back it up. It's obvious you feel a bit hidden guilt from all your reich-wing brethren shooting up the place whether it's abortion clinics or moderate politicians.

And your tedious & absurd oversimplification of REGIONAL weather events to "disprove" GLOBAL warming shows your lack of logic and critical thinking skills (let alone your pathetic skills in science & history). You're part of the problem in dumb AmeriKKKa....

Tom C said...

OK Carl C - last post

Here is the Squeaky/environmental connection - from MSNBC, so you can trust it, right?

"During her own trial, Fromme either refused to attend or had outbursts. Her attorney John Virga argued that she simply wanted to call attention to environmental issues and Manson's case and never meant to kill Ford."

Finally, I did not try to disprove AGW by regional weather events. What I said is the obverse, that it is wrong to try to prove AGW by regional weather events.

Steve Reynolds said...

For those thinking only Fox news counters Carl's opinion:

At this point, there is simply no sound reason to believe this deranged young man was fired up by "toxic" or "eliminationist" conservative rhetoric from Michele Bachmann or whomever. Why are we even having this conversation? It's nuts. It's offensive. Is there any, you know, evidence that political rhetoric is now more vitriolic or incendiary than usual? Maybe there is, but I know of none.

Carl C said...

From what I've seen & read, the kid was pretty nuts but a lot of his nutty ideas (currency, anti-government, anti-immigrant) seem to be rooted in the craziest bits of right-wing (see this LA Times article:,0,7697607.story

And I think deep-down the right-wing talk-show hosts, celebrities, and politician know they have been really over-the-top with the "Armageddon in America" psychotic rhetoric. But instead of toning it down or being contrite they still keep forging ahead in stupidity & the blame-game, and oddly acting as "victims" although they're not the ones being shot.

I mean, if Palin and her crew really thought the map was full of surveying symbols, they probably would have left it up, and had better proof than shifting blame. Instead pundits from Palin through Rush Limbaugh through Malkin through this unknown blogger on the Economist try to act the victim.

But at least Glock sales are up 60% in Arizona. As someone on a leftist blog I frequent pointed out -- "That's great for Austria, where Glocks are made, and their employees enjoy the socialist state of national healthcare, long-term unemployment benefits etc!"

Carl C said...

OK, this is my last post on this topic; so you right-wing dicks can get the last word! ;-)

Torygraph reports how Palin blamed by the US Secret Service for the increase in death threats to Obama (I personally witnessed the "lynch mob" effect she brought to her rallies):

And to ref the above Paul Krugman stuff; note that he didn't say it "caused" the Arizona shootings; just was part and parcel of the myriad of violent BS the right-wing has turned into a (psychotic) art-form. Which is pretty much all that James said here originally.

And all of this gets me ultimately to ponder - the US right-wing always claim to be the bastion of Christianity & holiness & "what would Jesus do?" How do these well noted history of violence & threats & hate-speech reconcile with Jesus? To me that would be the most obvious hypocritical thing about the whole mess. Of course these types had no problem reconciling the slavery of Africans with their bible (although back then there was of course a notable liberal Christian anti-slavery i.e. Abolitionists). But today's Repub party are obviously the ideological descendants of the white male southern slaveowners & their apologists. I mean hell they'd shoot Lincoln again if they could....

jules said...

> Which is pretty much all that James said here originally.

James did not suggest it was only the right-wing, but rather a more generic problem that extends back a lot further than one might have expected.

> I mean hell they'd shoot Lincoln again if they could....

WWJD? Get shot, obviously.

Anonymous said...

Pretty sleazy of you to distort that poster, nutter.

EliRabett said...

Sheriff Dupnik did not accuse any side of shouting fire in a crowded theater, he simply said there was too much of it. The right wingers are the ones who are showing that they are feeling very guilty about this

dhogaza said...

"The right wingers are the ones who are showing that they are feeling very guilty about this"

Yes, indeed. Note that TomC's argument boils down to "two wrongs make a right". He defends the rhetoric.

As a democrat, I was not amused when Anne Coulter, for instance, suggested that all Democrats should be executed.

Perhaps TomC can point us to a high-profile, widely-published, liberal influencial in Democratic circles who have publicly called for the wholesale execution of Republicans?

And perhaps TomC can tell us why Obama's quote regarding defending his campaign from attack is equivalent to calling upon followers to attack?

TomC equates self-defense with assault?