It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

More Bad News For Paul Krugman : USA Today Poll

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
They have failed to convince the American people about who is to blame for Arizona shooting.
USA Today poll is revealing the truth.
- USA Today Poll -
This is just about over.
Now we have to wait for the trial.




posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
I blame pot pies and a finate year personally

put the two together...powder keg.

Also, remote control cars and currency without my face on it is lame.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Just realized my former post sounded kind of crazy...

So, I guess I just blame crazy for the actions in Az.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
They have failed to convince the American people about who is to blame for Arizona shooting.
USA Today poll is revealing the truth.
- USA Today Poll -
This is just about over.
Now we have to wait for the trial.


I heard a CBS News poll with similar numbers quoted on the radio this morning. Interesting that the percentages are about the same as congress is divided. Could be that the same Americans that voted out the democrat majority are now also rejecting the dems attempts to demonize conservatives for the actions of a madman.
edit on 1/12/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   
I believe it is obscene and beyond tasteless for either side to try to make political hay from this.

The moronic "coke versus pepsi" style rabid partisanship has now reached perverse levels. It may be that partisanship will prove far more destructive to the US than any lone madman will ever be. Rabid partisanship results in sloshed thinking and illucidity, warped logic, and violence to the corpus of society. Sound familiar?



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   
If Mr. Loughner had not tried to kill a political figure, the tragic story sadly by now would be out of the news. But because a member of Congress was involved (especially one who had been in the crosshairs on a map), not only will the tragedy continue in the news, but, at the instant it occurred, the motive was connected directly to talk of crosshairs and "2cd Amendment remedy". This connection was not unreasonable at the time.

Apparently the shooter's connection with his victim goes back to at least 2007. It still could be established that what finally prompted the mentally ill young man to kill with a gun leads back to specific language/images, but further search for a motive/evidence may just as well return a nil or ambiguous link.

Obviously, the mentally ill killer was angry, and this specific tragedy should be the wake up call that society itself has become ugly with anger. You cannot infuse words, images, or actions about killing into public life and expect not to have an effect. Bullies infuse their surroundings with fear, then often recoil in mock contriteness (or fear and anger) when confronted.

If we're supposed to be the Home of the Brave, we act as if we are afraid, and angry because of our fears. If we are truly fearless, we would build rather than destroy bridges with others. As a Good Book says, "perfect love drives out fear."



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by desert
If Mr. Loughner had not tried to kill a political figure, the tragic story sadly by now would be out of the news. But because a member of Congress was involved (especially one who had been in the crosshairs on a map), not only will the tragedy continue in the news, but, at the instant it occurred, the motive was connected directly to talk of crosshairs and "2cd Amendment remedy". This connection was not unreasonable at the time.

Apparently the shooter's connection with his victim goes back to at least 2007. It still could be established that what finally prompted the mentally ill young man to kill with a gun leads back to specific language/images, but further search for a motive/evidence may just as well return a nil or ambiguous link.

Obviously, the mentally ill killer was angry, and this specific tragedy should be the wake up call that society itself has become ugly with anger. You cannot infuse words, images, or actions about killing into public life and expect not to have an effect. Bullies infuse their surroundings with fear, then often recoil in mock contriteness (or fear and anger) when confronted.

If we're supposed to be the Home of the Brave, we act as if we are afraid, and angry because of our fears. If we are truly fearless, we would build rather than destroy bridges with others. As a Good Book says, "perfect love drives out fear."


I'm wondering if we will see crosshairs from the DNC around October 2012.
We live in a society of chronic amnesiacs. I wouldn't be surprised.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


Just because the polls indicate that public opinions lean one way or the other doesn't make those opinions correct or factual. There clearly was a time when far more than 70% of the worlds' population believed the world was flat and as it turned out, they were definitely wrong. This scenario has been repeated numerous times throughout history. People tend to believe what they want to believe.

IMO, the shooting was clearly politically motivated, whether it had been festering since 2007 or not, as the notes recovered from Loughners' safe clearly indicate his disdain for rep. Gifford and her political beliefs. It's more than clear to me that he intended to kill rep. Gifford and as many of her constituents as he possibly could and that's why he chose a political rally at which to commit his rampage. If he just wanted to kill rep. Gifford, he probably could have chosen a much more secluded site and he wouldn't have needed multiple 30 round clips of ammo to carry out his act.

Just because we are afforded the luxury of free speech in this nation doesn't mean that we should abuse that freedom to incite anger or hatred especially in the form of innuendos that refer to armed revolution or "2nd amendment remedies" with regard to politics. When people with political influence abandon the idea that the democratic process should be respectful and civilized, choosing instead to utilize fear and hatred as a political tool, one can hardly expect to see any other results.

Thoughts and words are very powerful tools and the sooner we realize this, the better off we'll all be. There's an old saying that I believe we should all be mindful of and it goes like this; "Thoughts held in mind, produce of their kind"



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
I don't understand how we will be better off? Are you implying that when we eliminate freedom we will be better off? We can agree to disagree in this country and still get things done.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Eh you're buying into the propaganda of the left, no where is there any evidence he was politically motivated, you're making assumptions. Even his friend said he paid no mind to politics and I think he would know better than either you or I since he knows Loughner. Freedom of speech is exactly what it is, you can't pick and choose. If you want to go down that road then we could end up living in a totalitarian society years from now, if you give them an inch they will run with it. If you're going to charge the right with hate then you have to charge the left, everyone is guilty if you want to play the game.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Jeremiah Johnson
 


I never said that we should eliminate free speech or anything to that effect. I only said that words and thoughts are powerful tools and that people should be mindful of that fact. It's no different than screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater, you may have the right to do it but there will be consequences and people may get hurt.

For anyone to say that "there is no evidence that this was politically motivated" is nothing more than outright denial. Didn't he choose a political rally at which to commit his rampage? Wasn't his primary target, (according to notes found in his safe) an elected politician, namely rep. Gabrielle Gifford, whose views he is on record as opposing as far back as 2007? I don't know if you've read any of his online post, but he post consistent rants against our monetary system and anyone, namely politicians, who he believes only purpose for being in politics is to support that monetary system.

If for instance, the shooting had taken place in a "Luby's" restaurant like the one in Killeen, Tx. and the congress woman had been shot during the melee while having dinner with her family, I might question the shooters' political motives. That was clearly not the case in Tuscon. This shooting took place at a political rally with the primary target being an elected politician. I'm not sure just what kind of evidence you're waiting for but if it's going to take a signed statement from Loughner that he hates all democrats or republicans, we may be in for a long wait.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Again you're still making assumptions, politicians and leaders have been the targets of assassination for thousands of years, that will not change no matter who's on the radio or what news station you watch. It is what it is, the guy is insane, who knows what is going through his whacked out mind. All you need to do is take a look at his mug shot, clearly he is touched.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Jeremiah Johnson
 


Yeah but

Yeah but

Yeah but

I have one but do you?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Jeremiah Johnson
 


Clearly he is touched. The Indians will not bother him anymore!


Zindo



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Hey, I just found this. Caddel, a Democrat Strategist thinks he is a #

Warning, graphic language used. I can assume he means anyone like the Sheriff that said the same things and the President that thanked him for his rhetoric.




posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


There is another saying. "Denial is more than a river in Egypt."


Once again, the left has failed miserably at trying to teach the American people how to think.
Sometimes they just don't buy your load of BS.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
This is what happens when you have billionaires paying for groups of like-minded people to play in this 'Gotcha News Cycle" system trying, and almost succeeding, in planting the seed of discourse only to benefit their political slant. No matter there is no truth to their spinning's. It only matters that it furthers their warped political agenda!

Zindo
edit on 1/16/2011 by ZindoDoone because: spelling



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   
The New York Times OP-ED writer, and nobel peace prize winner: Paul Krugman, is my hero.
And thats that!!!


Erno



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
I still find it strange that this guy will get to keep on spilling his ignorance. His batting average is less than Michael Moore and gets nearly the same following!
Zindo

edit on 1/20/2011 by ZindoDoone because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join