Because the one does not target individuals by name. It identified states they wanted to win, in order to win the presidency.

 

Win how, by going behind enemy lines? Any fool who can use acomputer knows who is representing those states.

 

Sarah Palin has an eye tattooed on each ass cheek.

 

You're an idiot, tenguy. That map was used to target states in a PRESIDENTIAL RACE! It's right there in the legend, and in the caption at the bottom.

 

An idiot? Who is an idiot, you stand and defend a party that says they are going to war against their opposition.

 

You got to be kidding me. You cannot be serious.

It has been shown that the shooter is mentally ill. The Pima Community College banned him due to him being a threat to fellow students and the faculty. And the parents were notified by Pima Community College that he would not be allowed back unless he was seen by a psychiatrist, which the parents never did.

He has had a long history of doing drugs. The Army refused him due to do drug use.

How can you possibly make this a political agenda? Seriously, there are so many other factors here.

No one has yet to understand the reason behind him shooting Giffords. And no one will, until the results come back from psychiatrists or law enforcement agencies.

If those actions can and do have consequences, then we would have seen a large increase of murders or assassination attempts on Democrats. But we have not. There are 20 people on the map, no where on that map does it mention anything to do about violence, all it does is target people. To make a target of someone, does not mean violence.

Prime example would be if I were to make a map of the world and target members from the forum who are Democrats or liberal in their thoughts and post it on here. That just means that you are the focus of my attention, that there is a reason why I am singling all of you out.

The map just put targets on the 20 Democrats who won seats from Republicans and Palin wanted to get those seats back from the Democrats. It is that simple. No where on there is there mention of using force nor violence. So there is no way to make such a claim that Palin had anything to do with the shooters actions.

The map only has one thing everyone holds onto, and that are the crosshairs on them. Now, if we are going to go by that, then we can go by the bullseyes on the 9 states on the Democratic map. Crosshairs and bullseyes are both used to point to a target. So if the only reason for linking a person to an action, is the picture chosen to represent how to point a target, then the Democrats were as guilty as Palin was.

 

McCain's attacks fuel dangerous hatred

I have already posted this in another thread, but it is relevant to the topic of this one.

---------

October 10, 2008|By Frank Schaeffer

John McCain: If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism and portraying Mr. Obama as "not one of us," I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence.

At a Sarah Palin rally, someone called out, "Kill him!" At one of your rallies, someone called out, "Terrorist!" Neither was answered or denounced by you or your running mate, as the crowd laughed and cheered. At your campaign event Wednesday in Bethlehem, Pa., the crowd was seething with hatred for the Democratic nominee - an attitude encouraged in speeches there by you, your running mate, your wife and the local Republican chairman...

John McCain and Sarah Palin, you are playing with fire, and you know it. You are unleashing the monster of American hatred and prejudice, to the peril of all of us. You are doing this in wartime. You are doing this as our economy collapses. You are doing this in a country with a history of assassinations.

Frank Schaeffer is the author of Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back.

https://articles.baltimoresun.com/2...67_1_john-mccain-mccain-and-sarah-sarah-palin

---------

Frank Shaeffer is also the son of Francis Schaeffer. He was one of the intellectual leaders of the Religious Right, and gave several sermons that I watched on D. James Kennedy's Coral Ridge Hour.

 

Who, other than the mentally ill, are likely to do what he did? That's the point -- that there are deranged people out there who WILL respond to this sort of rhetoric, and it is irresponsible and dangerous to poke them with a rhetorical stick.

 

Tell me, El Casanova...what did Sharron Angle mean when she spoke of "second amendment remedies"?

 

Do you know?

 

Yes, I have a pretty good idea...but not because she elaborated on it. The gun nuts out there knew what she meant. She meant that if they don't get their way at the ballot box, it's time to take up arms.

 

I'll let Keith Olbermann have my last word on the subject...he said it better than I could, and since some of you wouldn't be caught dead watching his show, this will make it easier for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NILQy11biY

 

If a person is mentally ill, you cannot blame another person for his or her actions. There is speculation that the shooter might be paranoid schizophrenic, and if this is true, Palin definitely had nothing to do with it. Just look up about paranoid schizophrenia, and you will know what I mean. I already learned all about this crap in an abnormal psychology class last semester.

 

You're not listening, EC. The fact that he's mentally ill means that he's exactly the kind of person who MIGHT be influenced by over-the-top violent rhetoric and prompted into action. That doesn't make Sarah Palin legally responsible for the shooting, but it doesn't absolve her of moral responsibility either.

 

Well, did you hear her whole answer on the talk show? Or did you just hear about the phrase second amendment remedies? I am asking because if you heard the whole answer from Sharron Angle, then you would know she was talking about the historical context of why the second amendment came about, and also used Thomas Jefferson as an example to elaborate.

She did not say that people should use second amendment remedies, she said that people might use second amendment remedies. Big difference between stating to do it, and that people might do it.

Maybe you should listen to Sharron Angle on The Lars Larson Show again, and let me know what you think.

 

Okay, you are not listening.

Is there proof that the shooter went to Palin's website and saw the map?

Is there proof that the shooter is a Republican?

Is there proof that the shooter shot Giffords because he went on Palin's website and saw the map?

After you answer no to all those questions, the next two words that should resonate into your mind is hearsay and speculation.

And that is how libel and slander is done by the media and people who wants to create something to be political, when there necessary has nothing political about it.

 

I've seen the clip in context. It's pretty clear to me that she considered it the inevitable result of the course she perceived the country was on. And she followed it, immediately, by citing the need to "take Harry Reid out".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU9GXil9Vm8

And by the way, the Second Amendment was not put into the Bill of Rights so that people could try to overthrow the government through armed rebellion, no matter what the right wing may say. It was put in because the founding fathers envisioned a citizen militia to DEFEND the country.

 

Isnt how all politicians work, not using the facts but twisting them to their favor....All are guilty of rhetoric, and igniting their political base. To them, just a game for who can hold the most power. Both sides will twist the facts of this incident to their favor................

 

I have no idea what his motives were and neither do you. I'm saying that violence-tinged, trigger-happy rhetoric has the POTENTIAL to spur someone like this into action, and that people should behave more responsibly. You appear to deny that.

And you can't seriously believe that this event was NOT political....can you?

 

I understand that the founding fathers found the Second Amendment for the use of the militia. But you evidently forgot the founding father's idea in regards to what Sharron Angle said. In the Declaration of Independence there are two lines where it states the following:

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. "

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Now I know that this may not be enough for you, so lets talk about Thomas Jefferson, who Sharron Angle spoke about in her interview. Here are some of his famous quotes.

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

Now, please understand that these are all saying from historical documents and one of our founding fathers. So, what she states is how this country was created.