Sheriff Dupnik's criticism of political 'vitriol' resonates with public

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. He is saying that the first assumption he (along with many people from all over the political spectrum) made was that this shooting was political, not that the shooting actually was. He later admits that the the shooter is mentally unstable by saying:
“It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.”
which is the closest he comes to explicitly implicating Republicans for this particular event.
Paul Krugman and the New York Times are the primary cheerleaders for the “Sarah Palin is responsible for the shootings in Tucson” narrative. Paul Krugman has credibility only with the far left . Most people view him as a prime example of why the once great New York Times has lost the respect of most people in America.
 
I’m just calmly and rationally debunking a riddled-filled, error-filled WND piece. Not very difficult to do.
LOL!

Did you actually read the piece? Caitie Parker, former classmate and band member of Loughner’s was twittering to Anthony DeRosa. From the piece: '“Antderosa” is the Twitter username for Anthony DeRosa, an employee of Reuters Media, who has had a history of tweeting continuing attacks on Fox News and Fox News talk show hosts Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly, as well as a wide range of conservative media and political figures. "

"Almost immediately after the news of the shooting broke, Caitie Parker self identified on Twitter that she had gone to school and been in a band with Loughner: Then, in responding to “antderosa,” Parker made clear that Loughner "was a pot head & into rock like Hendrix, The Doors, Anti-Flag:"

You see,** Anthony DeRosa was the left wing journalist who reported the Caitie Parker comments, hoping to get some scoop on Loughner. He’s the same one you’re attempting to “debunk.” You don’t get to pick and choose the Truth based on what answers she gave. That would be Bigotry**. Corsi is simply rebroadcasting their communication.

Read more: Radical leftist punk band inspired accused gunman wnd.com/?pageId=249741#ixzz1B8TJrspv

Glad to debunk your propaganda anytime…
 
Here are the first few sentences of his article:

"Climate of Hate
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: January 9, 2011

When you heard the terrible news from Arizona, were you completely surprised? Or were you, at some level, expecting something like this atrocity to happen? Put me in the latter category. I’ve had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach ever since the final stages of the 2008 campaign. I remembered the upsurge in political hatred after Bill Clinton’s election in 1992 — an upsurge that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. And you could see, just by watching the crowds at McCain-Palin rallies, that it was ready to happen again."

You read this as he “stops short of claiming that the shooter was politically motivated?” Seriously?
At least the Oklahoma bombing was done by someone who could arguably be said to be a right-wing extremist.

But the FBI actions at Waco two year earlier in the Clinton presidency were the direct cause of the Oklahoma bombing of course. The terrorist made that explicit right down to the anniversary.

Leftist rhetoric has no need for that fact either of course. Their propaganda blames right wing Republican rhetoric for all evil.

That is their only road to power. Trillion dollars of inept spending would be a hard sell otherwise.
 
Paul Krugman and the New York Times are the primary cheerleaders for the “Sarah Palin is responsible for the shootings in Tucson” narrative. Paul Krugman has credibility only with the far left . Most people view him as a prime example of why the once great New York Times has lost the respect of most people in America.
What newspaper do you propose as being superior to it? The WSJ? The Washington Post?

As a daily subscriber, I consider it the best newspaper in America; you don’t. 🤷
 
What newspaper do you propose as being superior to it? The WSJ? The Washington Post?

As a daily subscriber, I consider it the best newspaper in America; you don’t. 🤷
THey all are very good at lining my parrot’s cage.
 
What newspaper do you propose as being superior to it? The WSJ? The Washington Post?

As a daily subscriber, I consider it the best newspaper in America; you don’t. 🤷
The NYT is the best newspaper in America: it has the best obituary section of any paper anywhere (I’m serious: each obit is like a novel), it has the best Sunday magazine section, compared to “Parade” or “USA Weekend,” it has the best arts and reviews section - will probably have the best coverage of the Sundance Film Festival getting underway this week.

The NYT was President Bush’s biggest cheerleader when we went into Iraq - was the NYT such a bad newspaper back then? - but now that Obama’s president, the right wing blogosphere has declared NYT socialist commie pinkos. Makes no sense at all.

The NYT is still the only newspaper to have published pictures of aborted babies, a move applauded by pro-life groups like LifeNews. When can we expect FoxNews and WND to show pictures of aborted babies?
 
What newspaper do you propose as being superior to it? The WSJ? The Washington Post?

As a daily subscriber, I consider it the best newspaper in America; you don’t. 🤷
I’ll bet you listen to NPR also . I will admit that if one wants to be spoonfed liberal dogma these are the two most “superior” organizations to go to.
 
The NYT is the best newspaper in America: it has the best obituary section of any paper anywhere (I’m serious: each obit is like a novel), it has the best Sunday magazine section, compared to “Parade” or “USA Weekend,” it has the best arts and reviews section - will probably have the best coverage of the Sundance Film Festival getting underway this week.

The NYT was President Bush’s biggest cheerleader when we went into Iraq - was the NYT such a bad newspaper back then? - but now that Obama’s president, the right wing blogosphere has declared NYT socialist commie pinkos. Makes no sense at all.

The NYT is still the only newspaper to have published pictures of aborted babies, a move applauded by pro-life groups like LifeNews. When can we expect FoxNews and WND to show pictures of aborted babies?
Never.

A Jewish friend of mine gave me a description of “Jewish Sunday morning”: “Fresh coffee, a bagel with lox, sliced onion and a “shmear,” and the Sunday NY Times.” Sounded right to me, for after Mass. 🙂
 
I’m curious. I haven’t read all the later posts in this thread so I’m interested, have any of the liberals who get all their news from MSNBC and the Huffington Post and were earlier on the thread parroting the left-wing meme that Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Glenn Beck, and basically anyone who doesn’t approve of Obama was “responsible” for this shooting, have any of these people admitted they were wrong, now that we know the guy was a paranoid schizophrenic who didn’t watch the news, didn’t pay attention to politics, and started his obsession with Giffords THREE years ago when she didn’t answer his crazy question “what is government if words have no meaning”?
 
I’m curious. I haven’t read all the later posts in this thread so I’m interested, have any of the liberals who get all their news from MSNBC and the Huffington Post …
Who are the liberals on this forum who get all their news from MSNBC and the Huffington Post?

I don’t recall either conservative or liberal stating anywhere here where they get all their news from (except for me who gets it all from the newspapers and not at all from TV - I don’t own one). :confused: :confused:
 
Who are the liberals on this forum who get all their news from MSNBC and the Huffington Post?

I don’t recall either conservative or liberal stating anywhere here where they get all their news from (except for me who gets it all from the newspapers and not at all from TV - I don’t own one). :confused: :confused:
Since you saw fit to respond, you could at least answer my question, you can even strike the part about MSNBC and the Huffington Post if it offends your sensibilities as a regular reader of the paper that is OK with printing the creepy rants of Paul Krugman. So delete that part of the question and maybe give an answer.
 
Since you saw fit to respond, you could at least answer my question, you can even strike the part about MSNBC and the Huffington Post if it offends your sensibilities as a regular reader of the paper that is OK with printing the creepy rants of Paul Krugman. So delete that part of the question and maybe give an answer.
In response, I can honestly say that I don’t know which of the liberals among us relies on those sources for their news or what their post-shooting feelings about Ms. Palin at al are. I can only see what folks on this Forum post.
 
In response, I can honestly say that I don’t know which of the liberals among us relies on those sources for their news or what their post-shooting feelings about Ms. Palin at al are. I can only see what folks on this Forum post.
I just said to strike the MSNBC and Huffington Post from the question, yet you’re still harping about it, I can only summize you do not want to answer my simple question and are looking for distractions.

oh well
 
I just said to strike the MSNBC and Huffington Post from the question, yet you’re still harping about it, I can only summize you do not want to answer my simple question and are looking for distractions.

oh well
I answered you honestly to the best of what I knew about people’s sources of information. I did not mention MSNBC nor the Huffington Post, as you asked, so you are wrong to say that I was “harping” on those.

If you want to believe that I was refusing to respond, you might note that I was the only liberal who chose to try to answer you. As that didn’t satisfy you, perhaps someone else from our cabal of leftists will do so. 😦 🤷
 
I answered you honestly to the best of what I knew about people’s sources of information. I did not mention MSNBC nor the Huffington Post, as you asked, so you are wrong to say that I was “harping” on those.

If you want to believe that I was refusing to respond, you might note that I was the only liberal who chose to try to answer you. As that didn’t satisfy you, perhaps someone else from our cabal of leftists will do so. 😦 🤷
since you seem to be having trouble understanding what the question even was, I’ll post it again, without any distractions such as MSNBC or the Huffington Post for you to focus all your attention on;

I’m curious. I haven’t read all the later posts in this thread so I’m interested, have any of the liberals -]who get all their news from MSNBC and the Huffington Post and/-] who were earlier on the thread parroting the left-wing meme that Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Glenn Beck, and basically anyone who doesn’t approve of Obama was “responsible” for this shooting, have any of these people admitted they were wrong, now that we know the guy was a paranoid schizophrenic who didn’t watch the news, didn’t pay attention to politics, and started his obsession with Giffords THREE years ago when she didn’t answer his crazy question “what is government if words have no meaning”?
 
since you seem to be having trouble understanding what the question even was, I’ll post it again, without any distractions such as MSNBC or the Huffington Post for you to focus all your attention on;
Low key pejoratives about my “having trouble understanding what the question ‘even’ was,” and saying that you will remove distractions so I can focus all my attention are no inducements to providing you with a response.

But, there are enough other “lefties” on the Forum who have surely been reading this thread, and perhaps one of them might like to respond. I invite them to. 🙂
 
I answered you honestly to the best of what I knew about people’s sources of information. I did not mention MSNBC nor the Huffington Post, as you asked, so you are wrong to say that I was “harping” on those.

If you want to believe that I was refusing to respond, you might note that I was the only liberal who chose to try to answer you. As that didn’t satisfy you, perhaps someone else from our cabal of leftists will do so. 😦 🤷
Rich one thing you don’t do around these parts is admit to the fact you are a Dem;)
They.( the mods?) closed down the Political forum and it looks like this one is heading in the same direction. Peace to you all, Carlan
 
Rich one thing you don’t do around these parts is admit to the fact you are a Dem;)
They.( the mods?) closed down the Political forum and it looks like this one is heading in the same direction. Peace to you all, Carlan
But, but, I’m not a transvestite or a heroin addict and I hardly ever have to beat my wife. That should count for something, no? 😉
 
Low key pejoratives about my “having trouble understanding what the question ‘even’ was,” and saying that you will remove distractions so I can focus all my attention are no inducements to providing you with a response.

But, there are enough other “lefties” on the Forum who have surely been reading this thread, and perhaps one of them might like to respond. I invite them to. 🙂
It wasn’t a “low key pejorative”, it was merely an observation that three posts in a row you pretended to not even understand what the question was and avoided it (now we’re at four posts in a row). Anyway, it seems you have no desire to answer it, if you were hoping that I might get annoyed and say something “uncharitable” I’m sorry to let you down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top