Skip to comments.Bloodshed Puts New Focus on Vitriol in Politics (The latest spin from the NYT)
Posted on 01/08/2011 8:56:29 PM PST by Qbert
WASHINGTON The shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords and others at a neighborhood meeting in Arizona on Saturday set off what is likely to be a wrenching debate over anger and violence in American politics.
The original health care legislation stirred strong feelings that flared at angry town hall meetings held by many Democratic lawmakers during the summer of 2009...
Not since the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 has an event generated as much attention as to whether extremism, antigovernment sentiment and even simple political passion at both ends of the ideological spectrum have created a climate promoting violence.
Tea Party activists also condemned the shooting. Judson Phillips, the founder of Tea Party Nation, noted on his Web site that Ms. Giffords is a liberal, but added, that does not matter now. No one should be a victim of violence because of their political beliefs.
But others said it was hard to separate what had happened from the heated nature of the debate that has swirled around Mr. Obama and Democratic policies of the past two years.
DeAnn Hatch, a co-founder of the Tucson Tea Party, said her group had never staged any rallies against the congresswoman elsewhere, and she did not believe there were any Tea Party protesters at the event Saturday.
I want to strongly, strongly say we absolutely do not advocate violence, she said. This is just a tragedy to no end.
But others said it would be hard to separate this shooting from the ideological clash.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The assassin left a note.
If he were a card-carrying member of the Tea Party, Eric Holder would be holding a news conference and providing a copy of the note to every media outlet in the country.
Remember that fact.
A lie runs halfway around the world before the truth get’s it’s pants on....
I believe he was also the first to out the new “vitriol” talking point. Hmmm.
I wouldn’t bank on that predicted “wrenching debate”.
“@antderosa As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal. & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy.”
From what I’ve read, this guy is all over the map, politically-speaking. Not sure he can be labeled as “obviously a libtard.” Sometimes a nut is just a nut.
Thanks for that information.
“From what Ive read, this guy is all over the map, politically-speaking. Not sure he can be labeled as obviously a libtard. Sometimes a nut is just a nut.”
Somebody who knew him well described him as “quite liberal”.
And why can’t he be *both* a Lib and a nut?
Note to the Slimes: smearing your political opponents as accessories to murder is not a convincing way to decry extremist rhetoric.
Somebody on Twitter who claimed to know him well described him as "quite liberal." Not the most credible source.
And why cant he be *both* a Lib and a nut?
He could be, sure. Most libs *are* nuts (though usually not quite to this extent). I'm just saying that from what I've seen of this guy's videos, etc., his politics seem to be all over the place. For example, the infamous "favorite books" list - yes, the Commie Manifesto and Mein Kampf are there, but so are Animal Farm and We the Living.
He was a dope smoking loser liberal.....people who know him have been quoted saying so...
“Somebody on Twitter who claimed to know him well described him as “quite liberal.” Not the most credible source.”
The friend is apparently being interviewed by a number of legitimate news sources. I doubt they interview her if there wasn’t some shred of credibility to her story.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.