Sign of things to come?

Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic member of the US House of Representatives, was shot in the head at close range in front of hundreds of people.

A spokeswoman denied earlier reports that she had died and told ABC News she was in surgery.

A man was arrested after the shooting at a supermarket in Tucson where Ms Giffords was meeting constituents.

* Represents the eighth district of Arizona in the House
* First elected in 2006, re-elected to third term last November
* Has focused on immigration reform, military issues, stem-cell research and alternative energy
* Served in Arizona Senate 2003 to 2005
* Served in Arizona House 2001 to 2003
* Grew up in Tucson, Arizona
* Married to US astronaut Mark Kelly

Members of her staff were among up to 12 other people who were also shot. Reports say one of her aides has died.

Ms Giffords, 40, who represents the eighth district of Arizona in the House, is married to space shuttle astronaut Mark Kelly.

She has served on several congressional committees, including those covering the armed services and foreign affairs.

Jeff Rogers, chairman of the local Democrats, said Ms Giffords was "a rising star" in the party with hopes of eventually winning the Arizona Senate seat.

"That is terrible news," he told BBC News, describing her as "a wonderful congresswoman and a wonderful person".

He added: "We just can't continue to have this kind of carnage on school campuses and against public officials."

The Speaker of the House of the House or Representatives, John Boehner, said: "I am horrified by the senseless attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and members of her staff.

"An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve. Acts and threats of violence against public officials have no place in our society. Our prayers are with Congresswoman Giffords, her staff, all who were injured, and their families. This is a sad day for our country."

People are losing homes, jobs and all sense of normalcy. In the background are Glen Becks, negative campaigning and the sense that our government really doesn't care for the small guy.

Someone popping politicians would fit right in to that situation. I hope we are not that crazy yet.

I hope we are not that crazy yet.

How would his mental illness have manifested itself without the Glen Becks and our political climate?

[/quote] http://wireupdate.com/wires/13966/no-evi...jared-loughner/
[quote]No evidence that Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck influenced gunman Jared Loughner

Liberals and conservatives claim the alleged killer's reading reveals his true ideology. They're both wrong

No evidence that Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck influenced gunman Jared Loughner

But one classmate, Steven Cates, said he had tried on occasion to engage Mr. Loughner in political discussions, with no luck. He instead liked to talk about philosophy, or logic or literature, but not politics, Mr. Cates said.

I agree with you on a micro level. Looking specifically at this domestic terrorist, there is no evidence that Palin or Beck's rhetoric had any effect. But, on a macro level putting bullseyes on a map and telling your lemmings not to "retreat bur reload!" can't be helpful.

It's just a coinkydink that she took her Bulls eye target off Arizona and Rep. Gifford's district. Yep... no evidence at all.

Think she'll put it back up? Wanna bet?

They'll first need to edit it to reflect only 19 crosshairs.

From all I have heard the shooter was nuts. There are a lot of questions but this one will probably be nailed down to nothing other than mental illness however:

How would his mental illness have manifested itself without the Glen Becks and our political climate?

I didn't see the sign when it was up on her site. In fact, I didn't know the site or sign existed because I don't do a lot of searches for Sarah Palin's political wisdom. But how on earth can a person justify a sign like that! And now she has a message of condolence on her site for the tragedy. What did she expect? Or worse, is this what she expected and hoped for? And how does that sign not fall under the hypersensitive "terrorist" branding of late?

If this had been a school shooting, the student who put up the Web page with the crosshairs would be in custody now.

You're absolutely right! The same kind of people that want to blame drug use on athletes and suicide on Judas Priest are awfully quiet about Palin's culpability in this tragedy.

Yeah, because "don't retreat--reload" is so obviously a reference to surveying.

The Cloudy Logic of 'Political' Shootings

Where would Mike draw a line on Free Speech?

Too bad you didn't see the map before all this.

Too bad you didn't see the map before all this.

Free speech is an interesting concept.

If you spout stupidity you will be held accountable.

Why, because complaining now is like closing the barn doors after the cows get out.

Why, because complaining now is like closing the barn doors after the cows get out.

As I pointed out Palin was not the first to use targets on maps regarding political opponents.

“We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sights. It was simply cross hairs like you’d see on maps,” Palin said.

Tomato, Tomato.

I don't like Sarah Palin and because of that it would be convenient if a case could be made that her cross hairs perpetuated this tragedy. However, I gotta go with Thumper on this one. The symbolism looks lousy but I don't believe that in any way she meant cross hairs to have anything to do with actual guns.

But not all conservatives are happy about Palin’s rhetoric. On “The View” TV show on Thursday, co-host Elizabeth Hasselbeck called Palin’s use of crosshairs imagery “despicable.” Ms. Hasselbeck’s critique raised eyebrows in particular because she had stumped for Palin during the 2008 campaign.

During the 2008 campaign Obama said, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we'll bring a gun.”

Question for me is, would Mike still have said the same thing about the map if the shootings didn't happen?

Complaining now will not change the past.

If you outlaw crosshairs, what will be next?

[The symbolism looks lousy but I don't believe that in any way she meant cross hairs to have anything to do with actual guns.

My question for you is, why does it bother you so that I commented on them after the fact? Were my comments so far off base? Did I cry out for her head on a platter? Did I call out for censorship?

During the 2008 campaign Obama said, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we'll bring a gun.”

I think everyone will be a little more careful with their choice of words.

Any of you catch Chrissy Matthews yesterday on Hardball? He amuses me. Yesterday he was stuck on “there is not a country in any continent in the world that’s had this kind of history of assassination like we’ve had."

Had to LOL when Judson Phillips off-handedly told Matthews he didn't think that was true. Matthews looked dumb-founded and irritated that he would be questioned on his "fact". He repeated it.

psssst...Chris, off the top of my head: Nigeria. {{cringe}}

"Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own," Palin said in her statement. "They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election."

... and I don't think you can say the crosshairs were bad but the use of targets is OK.

Something else I didn't say. Thank you.

She finally hired a speech writer and followed the script.

"If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let's make sure it's worthy of those we have lost."
PRESIDENT OBAMA, speaking at a memorial service for the victims of the Tucson shooting rampage.

She finally hired a speech writer and followed the script. Good statement!

Most Doubt Political Rhetoric a Major Factor in Ariz. Shootings

"In conclusion, reading the second United States constitution I can't trust the current government because of the ratifications: the government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar," he wrote in a December 15 video message on YouTube. "No! I won't pay debt with a currency that's not backed by gold and silver! No! I won't trust in God!" Jared Loughner

The guy is nuts. End of story.

So, you equate being a Muslim to being nuts?

So, you equate being a Muslim to being nuts?

If rhetoric isn't capable of causing crazy people to do heinous acts, then what are we doing in Afghanistan?

The whole point of the war on terror is exactly that.

So Byron York did some word searching in CNN's archives, and found that in the month before the Tucson shootings CNN hosts and guests used the term "crosshairs" no less than seven times. Two of those references were to Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann. CNN described Palin as "in the crosshairs of big time Hollywood producer, Aaron Sorkin," while Bachmann was "in the crosshairs of Democrats."

If someone tries to shoot Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann, will it be CNN's fault for putting them in the crosshairs? Of course not. But it goes to show how silly the current talk about "rhetoric" is.

Stevie Ray Vaughn’s Caught in the Crossfire cannot be used as bumper music for NBA games.

Commentators covering political debates or campaigns, should refrain from saying one side has “provided ammunition” for its critics.
For that matter, the word campaign is also far too warlike. (War is a primary definition of campaign in the dictionary.) We will henceforth refer to “election contests” or “political contests.”

A candidate’s own effort should be called a “Primary Contest,” or a “General Election Contest.”

Similarly, we will no longer be using the term “battleground states.”

On air personnel should instead opt for “closely contested” or “states in danger of going Republican.”

Under no circumstances should someone who stubbornly holds to a position be said to be “sticking to his guns.” Republicans will be termed as “uncompromising partisanship” while Democrats will be “holding to principle.”

And please please please, never refer to an elected official as “shooting his/her mouth off” in light of recent events.

We apologize for saying that Sarah Palin was “under fire” for her crosshairs target map—but she deserved it.

“Point and shoot” cameras will not be advertised on our network, we are reviewing whether “point and click” is acceptable.

“Shoot” is not longer an acceptable exclamation in dramatic series television. We are cable, so we can just say “Shit!”

Track events at the next Goodwill Games will start with a checkered flag, not a gun.

Voiceovers on all ads for Target stores will be changed to pronounce the stores’ name, “Tar-zhay”

We are considering whether Scope must change its name to advertise with us, but ads which say the product “targets” the germs that cause bad breath will no longer be accepted.

The American Indian Movement will no longer be referred to as AIM.

Movies that fail spectacularly at the box office, will no longer be referred to as “bombs.”

Quibbling between groups or individuals will no longer be referred to as “sniping”

Anchorman Greg Hunter will be referred to on the air as “Greg H”, or “the G Man” while Wolf Blitzer will just be called “Wolfie.”

No employee of Turner networks will say that Paul Krugman and Jonathan Alter’s columns after Tuscon were examples of “shoot first and ask questions later.”

Please stay tuned for updates on this list. Thank you for your disarming professionalism during these times.