babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Ok if you're intention is to divert the thread towards your on agenda and pushing this thread to 100 so it gets locked.
Thats copied from another board Im on and not something Ive personally put together
@ Unionist
I don't know if anyone else here is trying to make a direct link between the accused and the Tea Party. I'm not.
I am just saying that attacks and murders with political overtones are a reminder that the violent rhetoric that some of these groups use is highly irresponsible. It is the same regardless of what his motivation was.
And I'm sorry, but the idea that we have to catalogue every other act of injustice in the world before we are allowed to comment on this attack is ridiculous. If something else is on your mind, start a thread about it, but with respect to the legitimacy of this subject, it is completely irrelevant.
And again, I don't care what her politics were. Even for politicians whom I oppose, I don't think their values make them legitimate targets for assassination.
I just wanted everyone to know that your socks are smelly and need laundering. There, now you know my real agenda - embarrassing you. I had to wait patiently for years for you to join this board so that my master plan could be put into effect.
There, we're closer to 100 posts now. But don't worry, someone can open a "Sara tried to kill the congresswoman - part 2".
Sarah Unionist, Sarah geez. We cannot vilify someone unless we have their named spelled right.
Gee, we must be reading different threads. Palin, Tea Party, hit lists... I guess I imagined it all.
Ah, there you go again. What political overtones are those?
Listen. I never said that. I said: "Why do we care about this?" - compared to the other stuff that we don't even care enough to read about, let alone catalogue? And why are we focusing on the "congresswoman"?
Gee, thanks for setting me straight. I'll stop calling for their assassination now.
Look, you obviously don't get my point when I lay it out in lengthy form, so perhaps sarcasm will succeed?
By the way, folks, Gabrielle Giffords is Jewish, as someone pointed out upthread - and the alleged shooter had a copy of Mein Kampf at home. Seriously. Wanna factor that into the "discussion"?
Oh thank god we can blame it on the nazis.
Or was he a self hating jew?
Gabrielle Giffords had several other brushes with violence
They're crazier than ten barrels of monkey doo down there.
Unionist,
I agree with many of the points you brought up. But I think it is important to note that certain powerful interests in the US are actively involved in a campaign of extreme right wing manipulation and indoctrination. The Tea Party movement is merely a means of dressing up all those wonderful features of US society you mentioned, and selling them to the masses. The Tea Party protests and speeches, etc, are an illusion given so that supporters feel as if they're part of a genuine social movement. But of course the obvious reality is that behind the scenes the elite are pulling all the strings. The only change that will come about from the Tea Party will be a greater consolidation of "a brutal and anti-human society, which murders its own people via lethal injection and impoverishment and unbridled capitalism and racism and homophobia..."
Even if we accept your above description of US society as the broad social context in which all political events take place, I think you would still have to admit that certain time frames can be set apart from others. I think that the current political climate in the US is one of them, with the economic turmoil, anti-immigrant hysteria, two wars, etc. etc.
As for Pakistan, having a discussion about one thing does not imply there is nothing else worthy of discussion. Some one chose to start a thread on the assination today, and others joined in. I'm sure all of us here are equally interested in talking about a broad range of issues, but sometimes physical reality overrides our desires. I'm aware there is violence in Pakistan. Were you aware that there is poverty in Winnipeg? Why aren't you talking about that Unionist?
Unionist, I think we have beaten around those first few points a few times. I'm not going to repeat myself endlessly.
But at least once in this thread you have used her politics as a reason why we should not be concerned that she was shot.
Sorry, but I am concerned when anyone gets shot. And I am even more concerned when that person is a public figure.
And even moreso when such an attack takes place in a society where it is okay to put gunsights on people's heads and use other violent rhetoric.
Yes, aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?
i am not anymore concerend about someone being killed just because they are a politican. Anyways, its a struggle out there, so many people are dying and I am suprised actually that these incidents are so rare, considering how little attention we paid to people with mental health issues both here and in the U.S
and yeah, before someone start calling out people for being crazy, lets try to do something positive for people with mental health issues. I am on anti-depressant/anti anixety pills, i forgot to take my pills last night, and i am crying everyday because i cant find a full time job, i am not far away from being crazy, how many do you think actually gives a flying fuck here about the mentally sick in Canada, even in toronto? people like us , the crazy ones, or the one close to being crazy due to many social/psychological factors, we die all the time, does the media care? does anyone care? what tragedy.
No - I questioned (and still do) why we pay more attention to such a shooting in the U.S. than in (say) Pakistan. I've cited some of the replies up there (democratically elected vs. not, etc.). And I also questioned why we would care more about an attack on someone who sends U.S. troops to Afghanistan than about their victims. Do you have an actual answer to my question? Or do you deny the phenomenon I'm identifying?
Well, you're a better person than I. I'm not concerned when "anyone gets shot". My head and heart just aren't big enough for that.
Now we're getting somewhere. I'm more concerned when the person who is shot is a victim of "public figures".
So you mention that, but not sending troops abroad, and lethal injections, and lack of health care and care for poor people and the environment. So you have implicitly identified your view of the causal factors here. My analysis is very dramatically different. That's legitimate, and needs debate and discussion.
Thanks for that, Bacchus. This thread needs some shaking up.
Unionist.
I have said a couple of times I don't care how you feel about this issue. I believe I understand your position and I think you are welcome to it.
As for how important and relevant it is I suppose the fact that the sun comes up every morning is probably of more importance to our existance than this tragic event. But it is hardly news.
For that matter, there are quite a few topics here I have no interest in, and which I think are completely ridiculous. What I don't do is do into those threads. stand in the center of the room and tell people repeatedly they should be talking about other things. I leave them to their own business and take care of my own.
Unionist, you are a sweetie. I understand why people are talking about this issue, i really do, i mean, she is a pretty lady, she is someone important, she is a congresswoman, she was shot, this is epic. When a child is shot, that is even more tragic. Its something people talk about.
Its nice though to see you trying to talk about other issues, because the truth is, shit happens everyday. Politicans mostly dont have to deal with survival issues, they made it big time, the people talking about this shit on CNN have nice secure jobs, they can talk about the political impact of this particular incident all day long, and meanwhile, shit still happens to ordinary people everyday, especially crazy people, some of them might end up being some crazy gun shooting freak who ends up injurying someone "important" because thats the only way for them to get any attention, any attention at all, good or bad.
yeah..
I also think about some big shot in suits and tie reading the news everyday, do they really care about humanity or is it a sort of thing they just do in order to "stay informed" , like what is the deal with these important taxpayers? They know so much about current events, they are great conversationist, do they really know what its like out there for the great unwashed? Boy, i wish i am like one of those people, talking about the state of politics over the dinner table..so important..
Boy, do i hate that Sarah palin! she is just mean and cruel.
Actually, could the thread be about the topic rather than about Unionist's views on the topic, which everybody who has been bothering to read now fully knows by heart?
Good plan in my book. :)
Actually I was thinking of parallels in our own politics. THere are plenty, but one which I noticed when it first happened was Harper referring to Bloc representatives as "seperatists" and saying that it would be illegitimate for the other parties to work with them.
It's not quite putting gunsights on your opponents, but it is ignoring the fact that they were in fact elected to represent the people in their ridings, and I think it is a similar attack on political institutions.
Thanks for your thoughtful posts in this thread to date, jas.
I guess you're looking for breaking CNN reports about the congresswoman's condition (she was dead, she's not dead, she'll be fine)?
The decision to postpone debate on the health-care bill signals an effort by the Republicans to avoid the potential for angry debate - in Congress and in the U.S. public - over an issue that produced threats against Giffords and other lawmakers last year.
Republicans have made repealing the health-care legislation their first priority upon taking control of the House in the 112th Congress. The Republican effort to overturn the health-care reforms is largely symbolic because Republicans lack the votes needed in the U.S. Senate to support the House effort.
Law enforcement officials in Tucson said Saturday they did not yet know of a motive in Giffords' shooting. Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said, however, that Giffords appeared to be the primary target of the attack.
Giffords, a moderate Democrat, voted in favour of President Barack Obama's $940-billion health-care overhaul last March. Her congressional offices in Tucson were subsequently vandalized. A protester left a gun behind at one of Giffords' town hall meetings in the summer of 2009, when opponents of the bill held angry demonstrations at several public events held by members of Congress.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Republicans+cancel+health+care+vote+...
Roll was not scheduled to be at the event, apparently. So, while it is possoble that the assailant was following Roll with the intent of assassinating him, that seems to be a less likely explanation.
"My understanding is he just went to the Safeway to do some shopping ... and he just stopped to chat and say hi, " C.J. Karamargin, Giffords communications director, told Fox News.
Police say suspect Jared Lee Loughner, who is in custody, killed six people, including Roll, a 9-year-old child and Giffords' aide Gabe Zimmerman, and wounded 13 others, including Giffords who was shot in the head as she met with her constituents at the start of the meeting.
Pima County, Ariz., Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said authorities believe Giffords was targeted by the shooter. But Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano said the killer is likely facing the death penalty even if he didn't target Roll or others in particular during the shooting.
Napolitano said it would be a federal crime of capital murder eligible for the death sentence if the killer's motive was to prevent Roll from carrying out his judicial role.
"If on the other hand he was just killed because he happened to get in the way, then it's not a federal crime, then Arizona law would take place. He still may be exposed to the death penalty but it would be under Arizona jurisdiction and not federal."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/08/arizona-suspect-likely-facing...
http://www.straight.com/article-367617/vancouver/congresswoman-gabrielle...
I feel bad for all the victims of this assault. But I have to wonder about Giffords being described as a moderate Democrat. What does it mean if the Democratic congress person who supports more border patrol and a surge of troops in Afghanistan is considered moderate? And why is the media assuming or implying that this event is related to her support for health care reform? I know that the right wing, especially the Tea Party "movement", are in a bent over backwards over it but what little I've read about the assailant, he seems to be a wing nut focused on the gold standard and government control over money, as well as a few other odd fixations.
www.GiffordsforCongress.com
This page is a forum to discuss the opportunities and challenges facing Southern Arizona and our nation as well as campaign activities. We ask that people maintain a tone of civility and respect with one another.
http://www.facebook.com/GGiffords
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/01/08/sarah-palin-blamed-by-bloggers-f...