Arizona | Crime | Gabrielle Giffords | Law Enforcement | News | Tucson

BigGayDeal.com

Watch: Tucson Sheriff Says Political 'Vitriol' Undeniably Tied to Giffords Shooting

Kelly

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik continues to speak out against the political vitriol and dangerous rhetoric.

Says Dupnik:

"I think that it's irresponsible for s not at some point to address this kind of behavior and try to put a stop to it....When allegedly credible people who get up in front of cameras and microphones and say that they're not true, and try to enflame the public. When miilions of dollars are filtered into this country to buy very vitriolic ads and they don't have to be identified - the countries that they're coming from or they people that are donating them. I think it's time that we take a look at it. Free speech is free speech but it's not without consequences.

Watch interviews with FOX News' Megyn Kelly and Geraldo Rivera, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Vitriol is the key talking point word passed out to democratic operatives. The sheriffs speech is pure political pandering attached to a horrible crime. It is an excuse to attack the first amendment.

    Evudence now is that the shooter was a registered democrat who studied the communist manifesto. And Mein Kampf ( National Socialism) He had stalked her for years and attended an event with her in 2007. Found the campaign thank you they sent him. His school threw him out for aberrant behavior. Political hate speech had nothing to do with it.

    And i would not blame Daily Kos, there is no real evidence he saw Kos' target on Giffords picture ( yes daily Kos targeted her ).

    The left has wanted to regulate political speech for a long time. Even if we said nothing a wacko like loughner would find some excuse to go off. No one said anything a sane person could justify murder with. I won't let the left make Palin or conservative speech the justifucation. That is unreasonable. Apparently giffords nor anyone else thought thev argets meant anything other than what it meant - take the seat by votes.

    Posted by: Ted | Jan 10, 2011 8:56:17 AM


  2. This man is part of a marxist left wing plot to rid America of what a good and just. Guns and Free speech.

    Hatespeech is the American way of life and should be used at all times.

    The right have the right to bully, insult, kill, assassinate as much as they want anyone who is pro-equality.

    The right wing are always right and left wing are always wrong.

    8 years of Bush is better then one day of Obama.

    Healthcare is the worst thing to have happened to American civilisation since the abortion of segregation amongst races.

    The left will burn in hell for all this peace, hope and obsession with everyone be treated as an equal.

    People get Jesus ALL wrong, y'know! He was a gun ownwer and would've had it off with St Sarah Palin of Alaska!

    Posted by: Rowan | Jan 10, 2011 9:02:08 AM


  3. Ted, your post was ridiculous. You need to quit watching Fox News.

    The truth is that unhinged political hate speech is destroying this country's political process. It doesn't seem to matter whether something is true or not as long as the person saying it screams it and repeats it often enough on TV. That is true for both ends of the political spectrum, but certainly more often right-wing than not.

    Really... Mein Kampf? The communist manifesto? Are you serious?

    Anyone who thinks that the gun-totin', know-nothing, gay-hatin', socialist-fearin' right wingers and their incessant fear mongering over the past how many years had nothing to do with the fact that the incidents of threatened and/or realized violence against elected officials is on the rise is hiding their head in the sand.

    Posted by: The Milkman | Jan 10, 2011 9:19:54 AM


  4. Rowan, thank you. Check out Pandagon and Amanda Marcotte's "Thoughts on the Inevitable Right Wing Deflection Campaign" http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/thoughts_on_the_inevitable_right_wing_deflection_campaign/ for a hint of how this is going to to go from the right wing.

    Posted by: Con Job | Jan 10, 2011 9:22:21 AM


  5. wow, the conservative trolls have hit every forum i read. this is very unusual, it this the new form of political damage control we are going to get with every news event?

    Posted by: mld | Jan 10, 2011 9:34:35 AM


  6. Ted: Your assumption that "Mein Kampf" has something to do with socialism shows how little you know about the book itself, Hitler, and the Nazi Regime. His use of the word socialism stopped with his use of the word. Hitler was a dictator. Nazi Germany was not an expirement of socialism. You speak about socialism as if you have never used an airport, a library, schools, universities, police and fire departments, bus and rail lines. All of these are socialist, Ted; and that is to name only a few concepts and institutions of socialism that you directly benefit from.
    Your beckspeak shows us where you get your information, from historical revisionists.
    Whether Loughner was influenced by the left or the right or both, I believe that most liberals will say that words have consequences. You as a person on the right want to continue to deny this. The right's spokespersons: Beck, Limbaugh, etc. already have blood on their hands with shootings and attemtped shootings in just the last couple of years. I challenge the validity of your comments.

    Posted by: tweedle | Jan 10, 2011 9:35:53 AM


  7. Rowan: Great comment on the parallel universe that the right lives in.

    Posted by: tweedle | Jan 10, 2011 9:36:49 AM


  8. @Tweedle: Right on.

    Posted by: The Milkman | Jan 10, 2011 9:58:08 AM


  9. Wow, and here they are in force, the conservative trolls to tout their hate all over again in the shadow of what has happened? In light of all that happened they STILL only have blind allegiance to their Fox News machine POV?

    Ted, you need to look beyond your hate-speech heroes and at other sides of life, and accept that America is made up of people from BOTH sides of the aisle, that we are ALL Americans. Unlike those on the right, I don't need to be fed 'talking points' to have an opinion... I simply need open eyes and ears and and be objectively inquisitive...

    In her segment Megyn Kelly seems, with her tone to the sherif, to think no-one should have an opinion other than HERS (I mean how dare he share HIS opinion, right?)... SHE raised the Democrat label, he said NOTHING about his political party affiliation to her. He simply said violent political rhetoric was the core...

    And really, Geraldo, why should what the sherif said be seen as controversial... he simply said rhetoric should be toned down, and that is the kind of thing that causes these kinds of situations where mad men follow violent rhetoric which is used inappropriately and frequently by the 'right'. Of COURSE the GOP would say it's speculation that rhetoric caused this, because THEY are the ones that are using the violent rhetoric!!!! Good for the sherif for standing his ground and shutting Geraldo and Megyn down!

    Any of the politicians and commentators on BOTH sides of the aisle that have used violent rhetoric, need to find better, more rational and adult ways to express their political viewpoint. If they are not capable of doing that, they are not fit for office!

    Raise the bar and raise the tone. Enough is enough!

    Here's hoping that Congresswoman Giffords makes it through this ordeal, and sympathies to those families who lost loved ones!

    Posted by: CKNJ | Jan 10, 2011 10:11:01 AM


  10. ted no

    the evidence points to him being in need of therapy and meds and a radical Libertarian = economic conservative and social liberal

    libertarians also overwhelmingly vote republican

    Posted by: mstrozfckslv@yahoo.com | Jan 10, 2011 10:27:53 AM


  11. PS

    a return to the 'gold standard" is 100% conservative economically

    you repubs can't wash your hands of this guy

    Posted by: mstrozfckslv@yahoo.com | Jan 10, 2011 10:28:52 AM


  12. @ MILKMAN: Thanx! I also liked your comments.

    @ CONJOB: Thankx for a "most-excellent" link. The comments there are a must-read for progressives who want to frame the debate in an intelligent manner.

    Posted by: tweedle | Jan 10, 2011 10:36:36 AM


  13. Ted, you complain about the sheriff's "political pandering" and then go on to politically pander.

    Inflammatory political rhetoric is dangerous, whether or not an individual shooter is directly influenced by it. Free speech comes with consequences. If anyone uses violent speech and imagery to score political points and garner news headlines, they will need to look inside themselves when a tragedy occurs.

    One person to point this out was, in fact, Congresswoman Giffords, who, long before the shooting, talked about the potential consequences of being violently targeted by another politician. Unfortunately, the consequences she spoke of are now all too real.

    Whatever the personal motives of Jared Loughner, Sarah Palin and other deliberately inflammatory media prostitutes can't walk away from this. If you have to scrub speech from your website and deny your own violent words and images after a tragedy, then you can't pretend to have a clean conscience.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jan 10, 2011 10:44:29 AM


  14. ALL who have been publicly advocating "revolution," or suggest "taking back 'our' country" or show up at rallies with firearms or say that "second amendment remedies" might be employed, provide validation for extreme actions. The more unbalanced a person is, the more likely they are to be affected by such rhetoric, and one doesn't have to be a paranoid schizophrenic to feel a call to action. That call wouldn't necessarily be heard only if one's chosen political group speaks it. Palin and the Tea Party are well-known for this particular rhetoric; if one can provide evidence that left-leaning groups with wide-spread public forums have contributed to this discourse, then we get to point out their possible culpability as well.

    One important point made by MSTROZFCKSL is how one label doesn't tell the whole story. EXTREME left-wing politics might be just as scary as extreme right-wing. But extreme right-wing has become more "mainstream," and I don't know any extreme left-wing group that has a credible and influential platform in our current political scene. And if any of the reports that this shooter was part of a group that was against government and immigrants are true, then it would be really hard to say this person is the sort of "liberal" or progressive person I would recognize.

    Posted by: TJ | Jan 10, 2011 12:11:11 PM


  15. Ah, this stuff has been litigated for years in the courts and the shooting of one congresswomen by an apparently unstable individual will not persuade the SC to adjust the first amendment to outlaw hoary opinion mongering. We fought an entire civil war with 600000 casualties and one dead president and it didn't budge the first amendment, so you guys need a more historic sense of precedent.

    Posted by: anon | Jan 10, 2011 1:10:25 PM


  16. @Ted and Anon:
    "This is an excuse to attack the First Amendment".

    Actually, no it's not. No one (or rather, very few people) are saying that we shouldn't be able to speak our minds without fear of legal retribution. If they did, then that would be an attack on the First Amendment.

    What some are saying is that we should consider taking the vitriol down a notch. Or at least admit that when a powerful political celebrity puts gun crosshairs over a district with someone's name on it, tell supporters "Don't Retreat - Instead Reload!", or another person claims that either America gets on the right path or some will start turning to the Second Amendment, then those celebrity should understand that such powerful rhetoric may come with dire consequences.

    I read on Fox News yesterday that the shooting in Tucson has sparked a debate over the First Amendment and I thought, "No it hasn't." I've read dozens of news articles about this tragedy from all across the world and few (if any) mentioned the First Amendment. The victim here isn't the First Amendment at all; it's the people who lost their lives and their loved ones to a murderer.

    Posted by: damien | Jan 10, 2011 2:48:41 PM


  17. @Damien: Agreed. This is not a First Amendment issue. It's a responsibility issue regarding free speech. But even free speech comes with boundaries, particularly when threats are deemed real, and there are negative consequences.

    Posted by: TJ | Jan 10, 2011 3:08:31 PM


  18. The sheriff is a politician. I wonder what he thought of the movie made about George Bush being assassinated? Oh yeah, that was free speech. And a Canadian I believe made it. Wonder what he thinks of what the Daily Kos writer wrote a week or two ago about Representative Gifford being 'Dead' to him because she voted against Pelosi, strongly favors gun rights, etc.,? And no, I'm not a 'Neocon', or Republican.

    It's when incidents like this occur, you get to see how bad 'Radicals' or all stripes really are. Nothing is too low or off-limits, even using the murder of a 9 year old child by a paranoid schizophrenic, for political gain.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 10, 2011 3:18:54 PM


  19. And friends say he probably put Mein Kampf on his reading list because he knew it would incite people and he enjoyed yanking people's chain. Jared Loughner's mother is Jewish. And he is a self-described atheist.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 10, 2011 3:22:27 PM


  20. And National Socialism as practiced in NAZI Germany was indeed socialist. The state controlled the centralized economy.

    It's hard arguing with some of the tools on this site. Maybe, to paraphrase Obama, I should bring a gun to this knife fight. But then I'd be inciting violence.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 10, 2011 3:27:20 PM


  21. The Nazi state that controlled the centralized econonmy was itself largely controlled by the edicts and whims of one person. He maintained control with violence murder. Ted was trying to connect Hitler's socialist dictum to contemporary socialist concepts, many of which we live by today. The socialist goverments of Scandinavia and Europe are quite socialist, but they bear little to no relationship to what RatBastard and Ted are trying to connect them to.
    RatBastard, why even a need to bring a gun to this discussion? That it what it is, a discussion, not a knife fight.
    Touche`

    Posted by: tweedle | Jan 10, 2011 4:02:29 PM


  22. @Tweedle,

    I was not comparing NAZI Germany to Sweden or some other Euro nation the far-left worship. But NAZI German did practice a socialist economic model.

    As for social democratic paradises like Sweden, they of course during WW2 collaborated with the NAZIs. Countries like Sweden and the Netherlands [whom the far left idolize for their 'Freedoms', especially sex and drug related] they both legalized CHILD PORNOGRAPHY during the 1970s. And I'm not talking about teenagers.

    Check out some of the 'Liberating' things the leftist movement in Germany during the 70's, and who're the origins of todays green movement and political correctness:

    The Sexual Revolution and Children
    How the Left Took Things Too Far

    By Jan Fleischhauer and Wiebke Hollersen

    The briefcase contained a stack of paper -- the typewritten daily reports on educational work at an after-school center in Berlin's Kreuzberg neighborhood, where up to 15 children aged 8 to 14 were taken care of during the afternoon. The first report was dated Aug. 13, 1969, and the last one was written on Jan. 14, 1970.

    Even a cursory review of the material revealed that the educational work at the Rote Freiheit ("Red Freedom") after-school center was unorthodox. The goal of the center was to shape the students into "socialist personalities," and its educational mission went well beyond supervised play. The center's agenda included "agitprop" on the situation in Vietnam and "street fighting," in which the children were divided into "students" and "cops."

    The educators' notes indicate that they placed a very strong emphasis on sex education. Almost every day, the students played games that involved taking off their clothes, reading porno magazines together and pantomiming intercourse.

    According to the records, a "sex exercise" was conducted on Dec. 11 and a "f'ing hour" on Jan. 14. An entry made on Nov. 26 reads: "In general, by lying there we repeatedly provoked, openly or in a hidden way, sexual innuendoes, which were then expressed in pantomimes, which Kurt and Rita performed together on the low table (as a stage) in front of us."

    A few days later, Besser paid a visit to the Psychology Institute in Berlin's Dahlem neighborhood, "to take a look at the place," as she says. In the basement, Besser found two rooms that were separated by a large, one-way mirror. There was a mattress in one of the rooms, as well as a sink on the wall and a row of colorful washcloths hanging next to it. When asked, an institute employee told Besser that the basement was used as an "observation station" to study sexual behavior in children.

    It has since faded into obscurity, but the members of the 1968 movement and their successors were caught up in a strange obsession about childhood sexuality. It is a chapter of the movement's history which is never mentioned in the more glowing accounts of the era. On this issue, the veterans of the late '60s student movement seem to have succumbed to acute amnesia; an analysis of this aspect of the student revolution would certainly be worthwhile.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,702679,00.html

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 10, 2011 7:32:47 PM


  23. In his 1975 autobiographical book "Der Grosse Basar" (The Great Bazaar), Green Party politician Daniel Cohn-Bendit describes his experiences as a teacher in a Kinderladen in Frankfurt. When the children entrusted to his care opened his fly and began stroking his penis, he writes, "I was usually quite taken aback. My reactions varied, depending on the circumstances."

    http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-56344-3.html

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 10, 2011 7:34:47 PM


  24. Did you just make the freeper comparison to socialism=nazism? Okay...we're in crazyland. Um, you are...gone, so this is for others....it's impossible for a socialist regime (though the propaganda that they disseminated proposed a socialist society based on christian principles and founded in biblical tenets--a theosocialism that never left propaganda) to exist when organized labor is abolished? When the existence of unions was abolished? That's just one...example that discredits this insane claim. Workers had no control in nazi germany--it was rich industrialists/capitalists, aristocrats, and party favorites. I normally don't bother to correct crackpot ideas from the sewer of the radical right wing, but this should be an exception. Just because the nazi party had the word 'socialist' in it...does not a socialism party make.

    Posted by: TANK | Jan 10, 2011 7:46:44 PM


  25. Ratbastard proves the point: No leftist group with an influential position in today's political scene, in this country, even remotely resembles what he describes.

    Posted by: TJ | Jan 10, 2011 7:52:44 PM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «NYC: Model Mutilated Victim's Genitals with Corkscrew to Try and 'Cure' Him of His Homosexuality« «