Notes from Michael Moore on yesterday's tragedy

His last question is a good one.

Haven't we all expressed concern over the past many months that something like this would happen? Even Gabby, herself, said it, not knowing she would be the example. It is truly sickening that this would happen, and even more sickening to hear the hypocrites refusing to see any way they are to blame. Only Keith Olberman has come forward to apologize for comments he's made recently that were unkind and could be interpreted as inflammatory. The rest are all in denial.

Olberman will apologize then start up again next week. Wait and see. It is his nature and he can't help it.

Yes, it is insane and sickening. It was only a matter of time. Keith Olberman has class and a conscience. Some of the others don't. What I'm seeing on gather is that there are several individuals that are launching personal attacks on those of us who are questioning the graphics and rhetoric of people like Palin and Kelly who have used terms that might be considered inflammatory.

Well, Dam, I'm glad to see that you watch Olberman. He's great, isn't he?

I don't catch him much anymore but I did hear about this and watch.

I met to say Dan. typo

We witness the far and broad boundaries of Free Speech in our country--and we weep for Democracy's necessary imperfections

Beautifully put, Brett.

One thing that I would add, however, is that it is part of our spiritual evolution to do better--to be better.

After reading through endless posts on various sites, it's apparent that the right wing demagogues are in full denial mode as usual, just like their insistence that Obama is an Islamic Kenyan isn't based on bigotry and that Fox is a "news" media.

I've noticed that too, Denise.

Carla, for the last couple of hours--here on Gather--I have been 'harping' on the issue, you speak of:

The irreconcilability of self-examination, on the part of those who are TOO ANGRY to undergo self-examination.

Pride goeth before the fall.

Angry pride goeth before the recurrent falls that lead to a final DOWNFALL.

This is not a religious statement nor a secular one.

It is both.

Yes! Good for you, Brett! Keep up the good work.

Ugh..... the idiocy of politicizing what a LUNATIC did is beyond the pale. It's disgusting. Our thoughts should be with the victims -- not on scoring political points.

FYI - the guy was a registered democrat and considered liberal by all who knew him.

Which right wing site did you get that from, Don? Nothing of the sort has been revealed officially as yet.

P.S. Don, it appears that you are trying to politicize this yourself.

Carla, you are more transparent than you obviously know. The fact that you published the article made it political. To try to deflect that onto someone else is laughable.
Palin caused nothing. How about John Kerry, during his presidential bid, when asked about why he didn't go to a particular state and "kill two birds with one stone" he replied:
Or, I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone .

And one more;
On July 11, 2007, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Betty Williams gave the keynote speech to the International Women’s Peace Conference in Dallas, Texas, and said (to laughter and applause from the audience):

“I mean right now, I could kill George Bush , no problem. No, I don’t mean that. I mean — how could you nonviolently kill somebody? I would love to be able to do that .”

Earlier, Betty Williams said essentially the same thing

in a speech in Australia on July 24, 2006, proving that this was not just a slip of the tongue but something she thinks about frequently:
“I have a very hard time with this word ‘non-violence,’ because I don’t believe that I am non-violent…. Right now, I would love to kill George Bush

Where was your outrage then?

Thanks for your comments, Dan.

Sorry, Don, but the Registrar of Voters in Tucson said he registered as an Independent in 2006 and last voted in the general election of 2008.

Thanks for checking this out, Elsie.

Don, you said: Ugh..... the idiocy of politicizing what a LUNATIC did is beyond the pale. It's disgusting. Our thoughts should be with the victims -- not on scoring political points.

Agreed. %100

Dan you said: How about John Kerry, during his presidential bid, when asked about why he didn't go to a particular state and "kill two birds with one stone" he replied:
Or, I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone .

Tsk, tsk, tsk ...

The thought has occurred to me that those who are trying to blame Palin for the insane shooters doings are , hiding behind their own motive....Its a slur campaign to get Palin out of the presidential race that so many fear she will enter..Instead of writing articles about the loss of innocent lives and some fighting for their lives... I came on here and its all about Palin...
So Carla, it appears that maybe, the conservatives can do some thinking on their own and you all are trying to take a tragedy and turn it into something political...
No one from the right is in any denial mode.. I will be one that agrees that this went over the line BUT.... I dont think this nut job paid any attention to what Palin said.... THis guy had major issues... Gabby, seemed to lean more to being a conservative...I agree with many of her issues...
According to a blog, he was a liberal this written by some of his classmates. The TV reports that he was mad at the military as he didnt get it and at the recruiting office he was handed a Bible, which he didnt appreciate... This is why, in one of his blogs he says, that he will not trust in GOd.. He was kicked out of college for repeated offenses and the school board said, that they thought he needed some help... So try and keep blaming Palin for pushing him over... Why, would he listen to Palin if he is a lib?

Thanks for your comments, Vickey.

So far I haven't seen anything showing the shooter knew anything about the ad. It seems that if jumping to conclusions was an Olympic event there are many here who would be gold medalists.

Yes, let's celebrate, "Nobody's fault day." People are dead, but what the heck. At least somebody pried the gun out of his fingers before they were cold and dead. Let's get the conspriacy theories rolling before the truth prevails.

It was a Jewish, Catholic, Muslim, Protestant, Communist, Mexican, immigrant, Democrat, Republican, inspired crime.

There are six dead, more injured and somebody sold this jerk a 9 mm gun.

In the end the political bitterness that is running rampant in the country will have its way. We will all carry ID cards, some of us will wear arm bands proudly and others will be forced to. Our national borders will not have barbed wire, our states will. Soon it will no longer be a problem sneaking in, it will be a major crime sneaking out.

Who sold this idiot the gun?

Guns don't kill people, people who own guns kill people.

Guess you don't live in Arizona. Anybody can buy a gun legally and you don't need a permit to carry a concealed weapon. After all, this is the 'old west'.

Florida is nto that far behind. We are even entertaining the idea of the Arizona stop and check law.

Yes, it is crazy. Someone on gather going by Tx Black Gold or something like that believes that everyone should carry a gun. That is insane! It really is reverting back to wild west behavior. They'll be having duels and shootouts at the OK Corral, and drunks will be shooting people for looking at them wrong.

You neglect to point out that the shooter here was also shot by an armed citizen -- preventing a lot more bloodshed! A disarmed population can never be free -- remember that Nazi Germany started with gun registration!!

Visionaerie you said: the shooter here was also shot by an armed citizen -- preventing a lot more bloodshed! A disarmed population can never be free --

Is that right? Amazing ...
I agree; having an armed government over an unarmed citizenry which expects to be able to live free without oppression from the government, is like an Alvin Green trying to debate with almost anyone in this country and expecting to come out of it unscathed (poor guy is almost totally "unarmed").

Visionaerie B. Jan 9, 2011, 10:43pm EST
You neglect to point out that the shooter here was also shot by an armed citizen -- preventing a lot more bloodshed! A disarmed population can never be free -- remember that Nazi Germany started with gun registration!!

It's way too conveniently wrapped up to be attributed to "hate speech" or anything like that. The fact is, the military is using all kinds of experimental vaccines / aggression drugs and why do so many of these shootings always seem to lead back to the same places? Obviously there's a strong likelihood of this being an inside job -- deliberately designed to derail any chance to de-fang ObamaCare. The mainstream media is masterful at singing the government's song, even though it's just leading to more destruction. Why don't we ever get a real investigation of what happened? Instead we get more insider treatment to protect the real perpetrators. The real crosshairs here are on free Americans, so we had better start defending our freedom before we lose it for good!

Ah, I see I left at least one conspiracy theory out. Well ya can't name them all can ya. This is the reason I usulay avoid topics like this. I refuse to address this person above directly and I will not bend to his philosophies.

Nazi Germany began with rhetoric, prejudice and extremists, not with gun registration.

The difference in reaction by the liberal left to the Tuscon and Ft Hood attack. Hypocritical? I think so.

Journalists urged caution after Ft. Hood, now race to blame Palin after Arizona shootings
TAGS: CNN Gabrielle Giffords jessica yellin sarah palin
Comments (87) Share Print By: Byron York 01/09/11 8:58 AM
Chief Political Correspondent

On November 5, 2009, Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire at a troop readiness center in Ft. Hood, Texas, killing 13 people. Within hours of the killings, the world knew that Hasan reportedly shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before he began shooting, visited websites associated with Islamist violence, wrote Internet postings justifying Muslim suicide bombings, considered U.S. forces his enemy, opposed American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as wars on Islam, and told a neighbor shortly before the shootings that he was going "to do good work for God." There was ample evidence, in other words, that the Ft. Hood attack was an act of Islamist violence.

Nevertheless, public officials, journalists, and commentators were quick to caution that the public should not "jump to conclusions" about Hasan's motive. CNN, in particular, became a forum for repeated warnings that the subject should be discussed with particular care.

"The important thing is for everyone not to jump to conclusions," said retired Gen. Wesley Clark on CNN the night of the shootings.

"We cannot jump to conclusions," said CNN's Jane Velez-Mitchell that same evening. "We have to make sure that we do not jump to any conclusions whatsoever."

"I'm on Pentagon chat room," said former CIA operative Robert Baer on CNN, also the night of the shooting. "Right now, there's messages going back and forth, saying do not jump to the conclusion this had anything to do with Islam."

The next day, President Obama underscored the rapidly-forming conventional wisdom when he told the country, "I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts." In the days that followed, CNN jouralists and guests repeatedly echoed the president's remarks.

"We can't jump to conclusions," Army Gen. George Casey said on CNN November 8. The next day, political analyst Mark Halperin urged a "transparent" investigation into the shootings "so the American people don't jump to conclusions." And when Republican Rep. Pete Hoekstra, then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, suggested that the Ft. Hood attack was terrorism, CNN's John Roberts was quick to intervene. "Now, President Obama has asked people to be very cautious here and to not jump to conclusions," Roberts said to Hoekstra. "By saying that you believe this is an act of terror, are you jumping to a conclusion?"



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/journalists-urged-caution-after-ft-hood-now-race-blame-palin-afte#ixzz1AeHCZ0hZ

Dan you said: The difference in reaction by the liberal left to the Tuscon and Ft Hood attack. Hypocritical? I think so.

I haven't read the rest of your comment yet, but I certainly agree with that...

And unlike some others (can't remember who it was who thought it wasn't important at the moment), the president's and his admin's reaction to this is important. He failed miserably in regard to his first and continuuing reactions to the Fort Hood tragedy.

Hope he does better with this one. From what I've heard so far, he seems to be. And if he stays away from the false accusations and innuendo of violent political rhetoric being responsible in any way for the acts of this poor tragically impaired individual, I think he'll do fine.

If Sarah Palin didn't mean anything by her cross hairs map, targeting Democrat districts during the campaign, why would her PAC remove the site after Rep. Giffords assassination attempt? If the map was ok during the campaigns, and her claims that is didn't represent gun violence against dems, why all of the sudden it's so bad it needs to be removed now?

Whats so sad to me, this very woman Rep. Giffords, spoke out about Palins cross hair map, said that it could lead to violence against elected officials, and so prophetically it was her who had to become the very victim she tried to protect by speaking out.

I don't care what you may think who is to blame, obviously Ms, Palin felt she might have something to do with this, if only a small percent, and her removing the site speaks volumes to that effect.

Since Obama's election(and even before), there have been numerous cases of right wing nutjobs attacking, shooting, killing people and having been fans of Palin/Beck/Limbaugh/Coulter/Oreilly.
When the facts come out, many of these murderers were fans of the reichwing blubberers, many of them had the books of the blubberers, so to say that this problem is on both sides is a lie--how many of these shooters have had one of Thom Hartmann's books? Bill Press? Even Ed Schultz(who prolly has the hardest time keeping some of his emotions in check)? Go ahead, find em and lets see how 50/50 this is---HAH!
If you're going to yell "fire" in a crowded building, then you need to be held responsible for it, not do a Palin and have one of your minions come out and tweet that the crosshairs weren't crosshairs at all, they were map markers.....just cuz palin is that stupid, doesn't mean the rest of us are.

Also, Boehner, mr. cry me a river himself, spoke about this and about Rep. Giffords and not one tear--NOW he learns how to control his emotions??!!???!!!

Kim can you give us a list of: right wing nutjobs attacking, shooting, killing people and having been fans of Palin/Beck/Limbaugh/Coulter/Oreilly.
Give specific events.

I'm curious too. Kim?

Dan Sims Jan 11, 2011, 11:17am EST
Kim can you give us a list of: right wing nutjobs attacking, shooting, killing people and having been fans of Palin/Beck/Limbaugh/Coulter/Oreilly.
Give specific events.

Here is some evidence that the whole blame Palin and Conservatives for the massacre is believed by the liberal left only:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A majority of Americans reject the view that heated political rhetoric was a factor in the weekend shootings in Arizona which killed six and critically wounded a congresswoman, a CBS News said on Tuesday.

Since the Saturday incident in which Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot at point-blank range, various politicians and commentators have said a climate in which strong language and ideological polarization is common may have contributed to the attack.

Some of the analysts cited anti-government statements from the man arrested in the shooting, Jared Lee Loughner, as support for that view.

But CBS said its nationwide telephone poll found that, "57 percent of respondents said the harsh political tone had nothing to do with the shooting, compared to 32 percent who felt it did."