Congresswoman and 17 others shot in Arizona

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Azure

So I guess Stimpy was Lanny.

Must be the 3rd or 4th time he has tried to come back with a different name.

I was thinking that "Boy Stimpy reminds me of Lanny". Was never quite sure though.

Are you sure?

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Sticking with personal attacks of posters decrying political rhetoric seems like a good compromise though?

Seeing as though I have yet to make a personal attack yet, please point out this personal attack for me, I hope it is not my posting that people (such as yourself) are using this attack by a deranged lunatic in order to get political points, by stating how the language used by the Republicans is akin to language used by Hitler. That is an idiotic statement. I stand by that, there may be violence metaphors in both, that I have no disagreement, however the actual language used and the intent behind the language (which you gleefully ignore) are completely different. You seem like a reasonably smart person, so I will assume you know that the intent of the German propaganda machine was to dehumanize anyone who clashed with the ideal German, those obviously being Jews, Communists, Gypsies and people of a Slavic background. How that language is similar in "tone and passion" to telling people to "take aim" at political ridings during a democratic election is beyond me.

It appears to me as though your agenda is to demonize the Republican Party in general over this tragedy, you refuse to look at any other options other than this was an assassination attempt which while not sponsored by the Republican Party was one which was triggered by the actions of the right wing. You admit that there is no evidence to the contrary that could convince you otherwise and yet you say you don't have an agenda. You are letting your obvious bias blind you to the facts of this care which are becoming more and more evident that it is a mentally ill man who went on a shooting rampage, for what reason, none of us will likely ever know or grasp but one that would have happened if there was violent political rhetoric or not.

I know we will disagree on that but there has been no personal attack to date and if you think that there has been one maybe you should grow a bit of a thicker skin, although I assume you will take that as a personal attack as well.

[Calgaryborn]

I wonder if drug possession and related charges might be a natural window of opportunity to force a person into a psychotic assessment. If either the prosecution or outside persons involved in their life petitioned the court the Judge could consider a week of observation. That might not catch everyone but, there is a strong corrolation between drug use and mental illness. It would catch many of them.

It is believed that illegal drugs are often used by people afflicted with mental illness as a means of self medication. There is also a small but, growing catergory of people who have damaged their brains through hard drug use and develop psychosis. I realize that not everyone who has mental issues uses illegal drugs but, most of them do; Especially the younger undiagnosed ones.

Money and policy would have to be set in order and I realize this solution wouldn't catch everyone. It would perhaps be one part of a larger strategy.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

Seeing as though I have yet to make a personal attack yet, please point out this personal attack for me, I hope it is not my posting that people (such as yourself) are using this attack by a deranged lunatic in order to get political points, by stating how the language used by the Republicans is akin to language used by Hitler.

That's one.

What I said:
The problem is the tone and passion of the right; the current government is dangerous and your country is changing in the same ways Hitler changed Germany and Mao changed China.

How you understood it;
You are comparing modern political posturing in the United States to what Hitler or Mao did

How I clarified:
You are completely mis-reading my post...
the right was using allusions to Hitler while attacking Obama.

What you continue to construe my point as;
This either shows your complete disregard for history and common sense, much like the people you rally against, or it shows that you will attempt to manipulate facts in order to make them fit your own views, and do I need to state who this reminds me of.

One of us is obviously lacking in reading comprehension, Azure thanking you suggests it may be me, but I don't know how I can be more clear.

But I consider this little rant to competely support my point;

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

The fact is modern political rhetoric is nothing like what Hitler did, there is no widespread calls to break windows of Democrats, there has been no burning of buildings in order to blame this on the Democrats, nor have their been any calls for Democrats to have themselves branded with a symbol or to have their property stolen and be unable to own land or practice professions... Hell there is absolutely no similarity between the two.
Hitler was nothing like what we currently see in North American politics, it is an insult to those who you compare to him and an insult to those who suffered under the Nazi party. Stupid, much like those who compare Obama to Hitler. Stupid.

That was really the point I was trying to make. Allusions to Obama being Hitler (I can provide plenty of examples) - in the same vein as some did to Bush - is dangerous and wrong.

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

The fact you alluded to the Nazis in order to tell how awful the rhetoric is, shows that you are falling victim to rhetoric of your own and you are willfully and joyfully blind to it. You seem to revel in your own knowledge that you are superior to others who are less than you.

At least you're not getting personal.

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

Now I don't agree with a lot of the messages that the Tea Party and the like are promoting, but to blame this murder on them and people who use political rhetoric is really twisting the reality of the situation and doing an injustice to those who lost their lives.

I respectfully disagree, I percieve the injustice to be in telling the victim's families that this was a random isolated incident and the political discourse that she expressed fear of was inconsequential.

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

How that language is similar in "tone and passion" to telling people to "take aim" at political ridings during a democratic election is beyond me.

I consistently minimalized the impact of metaphors, and emphasized the rotten historical references you are expanding upon.

Willfully or not, you are debating against the opposite of my point.

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

It appears to me as though your agenda is to demonize the Republican Party in general over this tragedy..

Yet you are unable to expand on my agenda beyond it's lone tactic.

I do take the smear of "scoring political points" seriously, as that is exactly the tactic that Rush is using now, and it's toxic to debate.

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

you refuse to look at any other options other than this was an assassination attempt which while not sponsored by the Republican Party was one which was triggered by the actions of the right wing.

That is a mis-representation of my statement, which was

Originally Posted by Gozer

I consider the political leanings of the shooter irrelevant, he was at the epicenter of political emotion in the country. This is not a once in a generation coincidence.

and you have been beating this drum for a few pages now;
Being willfully blind towards any new evidence doesn't make you right, if nothing else it makes you more biased than anyone else in this conversation. I fail to see how being ignorant is seen as a blessing.
Blind to new evidence /= dismissing irrelevant evidence

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

I know we will disagree on that but there has been no personal attack to date and if you think that there has been one maybe you should grow a bit of a thicker skin, although I assume you will take that as a personal attack as well.

I'll put on a wetsuit next time.

I am annoyed at your pattern of posting in this thread because you are painting me as the bad guy without addressing my arguement, instead using accusations of ulterior motives to soil my right to make the argument.

Originally Posted by Gozer

The argument is not historic, that the left is always right.
The argument is not idealogical, that the right wing is more violent.
Those sentiments are NOT being offered.

What is being suggested is that one party finished an 8-year Presidency with an unmitigated disaster. Knowing the steep road back to political legitimacy, that same party is now endorsing a message of fear and hate from the fringe directed at an innately historic President in an effort to leave voters desolate and willing to latch on to whatever wave they ride in 2012.

[troutman]

Last week we saw a white Catholic male Republican judge murdered on his way to greet a Democratic Jewish woman member of Congress, who was his friend. Her life was saved initially by a 20-year-old Mexican-American gay college student, and eventually by a Korean American combat surgeon, and this all was eulogized by our African American President." -- Mark Shields, PBS

[transplant99]

The Congresswoman continues to make a remarkable recovery.

"

Today we were getting her out of bed again and we were able to stand with assistance," said Dr. Peter Rhee, Tucson's University Medical Center's trauma chief. "She's got the strength to stand on her own, lift her head up and these ... I see improvements every single day."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/19/...pt=T1&iref=BN1

[T@T]

Originally Posted by transplant99

The Congresswoman continues to make a remarkable recovery.

"

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/19/...pt=T1&iref=BN1

That is remarkable, 10 days removed from being shot threw the brain and she still doesn't have her skull.

Light jogging in 2 weeks

[Jayems]

The e-mail also says that Giffords gave her husband "a 20-minute neck and back rub."

Oh that's nice. You've been shot in the head and he still asks for a back rub.

[CaptainCrunch]

Everything about her recovery is amazing. Personally I thought that infection would have killed her, bullets are incredibly dirty.

[T@T]

Against all odds Giffords is regaining part of her ability to speak. Simply amazing since the bullet traveled straight threw the part of her brain that controys speach.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/02/09...ex.html?hpt=T1

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by T@T

Against all odds Giffords is regaining part of her ability to speak. Simply amazing since the bullet traveled straight threw the part of her brain that controys speach.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/02/09...ex.html?hpt=T1

The same part of the brain that controls typing and spelling?

[CaptainCrunch]

Is anyone else getting really tired of the grammer nazi stuff thats happening here?

[CaptainCrunch]

More on the Lougher side of things

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...71379A20110204

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Is anyone else getting really tired of the grammer nazi stuff thats happening here?

Proper spelling, good grammar, superb diction, and spoken eloquence are all signs of an intellectual, educated individual.

I just want the best for my peers.

[CaptainCrunch]

You're frosting my cornflakes.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

Proper spelling, good grammar, superb diction, and spoken eloquence are all signs of an intellectual, educated individual.

I just want the best for my peers.

It seems to me, correcting people's grammar and spelling is more often to used to make one feel smart, instead of actually engaging in discussion or thinking of any kind. The things actual smart people do.

That wasn't meant to be about you in particular, just a general observation.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

It seems to me, correcting people's grammar and spelling is more often to used to make one feel smart, instead of actually engaging in discussion or thinking of any kind. The things actual smart people do.

That wasn't meant to be about you in particular, just a general observation.

How else would you propose it would be done?

I'm aware of the North American stigma that it's rude to correct someone on their grammar, but unless you're in school and being red-circled by your teacher, there is no other way you'll learn (save electronic devices with built-in spellcheck). Everyone makes mistakes from time to time, and in my case if I'm called out on a grammar mistake, I'll usually facepalm and ridicule myself for the error, then correct it. But sometimes people consistently make the same mistakes over and over, and as a result, make themselves look intellectually inferior.

Thus, it is better to suffer the minor ridicule of being corrected openly, than to go quietly on without correction whilst everyone you speak to perceives you as a moron.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

How else would you propose it would be done?

I'm aware of the North American stigma that it's rude to correct someone on their grammar, but unless you're in school and being red-circled by your teacher, there is no other way you'll learn (save electronic devices with built-in spellcheck). Everyone makes mistakes from time to time, and in my case if I'm called out on a grammar mistake, I'll usually facepalm and ridicule myself for the error, then correct it. But sometimes people consistently make the same mistakes over and over, and as a result, make themselves look intellectually inferior.

Thus, it is better to suffer the minor ridicule of being corrected openly, than to go quietly on without correction whilst everyone you speak to perceives you as a moron.

Have you considered that it may be better to not give everyone the impression that you're a total d-bag?

I get it when there are major errors that make posts unintelligible, but there's no need to jump on minor errors like those you pointed out above. All it does is make you look like a petty person who inflates their ego by finding inconsequential mistakes on the internet.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by valo403

Have you considered that it may be better to not give everyone the impression that you're a total d-bag?

It has, but I can't possibly expect to please everyone all the time, and I have no intention of trying either. To do so ultimately invites failure one hundred percent of the time.

The thought has also occured to me that I should stay silent and rebuke said offender with quiet, indignant contempt. But, if it were me, I would rather be corrected before I make the same mistake again.

In this particular case, I thought it would be clever to make an allusion to the brain's process of speech and written dialogue, accompanied with green text, as is the common tactic when one wishes to make it known beyond any doubt that they are being sarcastic.

Evidently, I failed. But I make no apologies for it.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by valo403

Have you considered that it may be better to not give everyone the impression that you're a total d-bag?

I get it when there are major errors that make posts unintelligible, but there's no need to jump on minor errors like those you pointed out above. All it does is make you look like a petty person who inflates their ego by finding inconsequential mistakes on the internet.

I don't point it out very often but common spelling mistakes do irritate the crap out of me. I think it's mainly because spelling and grammar are things most people learn how to do properly at around age 10, so I've always figured that I'm not setting the bar very high by expecting others to be able to differentiate between "their," "there," and "they're."