This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Paul Krugman Comments On Shooting, Blames Republicans For "Hate-Mongering"
Just posted by Paul Krugman, who apparently doesn't need to hear the facts before blasting away at Republicans.
From the NYT:
We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was. She’s been the target of violence before.
And for those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind Republicans
might be able to work with, might be a target, the answer is that she’s a
Democrat who survived what was otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona,
precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist. (Her
father says that “the whole Tea Party” was her enemy.) And yes, she was on Sarah Palin’s infamous “crosshairs” list.
Just yesterday, Ezra Klein remarked that opposition to health reform was getting scary.
Actually, it’s been scary for quite a while, in a way that already
reminded many of us of the climate that preceded the Oklahoma City
bombing.
You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship
whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck,
Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we’re going to see in the months
and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a
climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a
stand against the hate-mongers.
Update: I see that Sarah Palin has called the
shooting “tragic”. OK, a bit of history: right-wingers went wild over
anyone who called 9/11 a tragedy, insisting that it wasn’t a tragedy, it
was an atrocity.
Update: I’m going to take down comments on this one;
they would need a lot of moderating, because the crazies are coming out
in force, and it’s all too likely to turn into a flame war.
»
- 16177 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Shalom Bernanke's money as debt:
http://careandwashingofthebrain.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-has-federal-reserve-refused-to.html
If you can't do something well do something else horribly.
There is a lot of hate-mongering going around, however it isn’t just by the Republicans as any visitor to the Huffpost comments can attest.
But Krugman and others are wrong to think of it as a cause instead of a symptom, to be solved by Democrats and Republicans uniting to quash "extremism". In that regard, Krugman et al are just parroting the mainstream credo that there is no problem except not enough censorship, not enough restrictions, not enough surveillance, not enough policing, not enough pre-crime imprisonment and post-crime punishment .
Forget about the economic dislocations and inequities of wealth and power. Forget about the endless and counter-productive wars on drugs and terror. Forget about fear mongering by our government, and its claim to “righteous” assassination and torture. Forget about the crumbling cities, schools, mass imprisonment, and mass unemployment. Forget about the neglect of the mentally ill.
Forget about it all, and let us be so surprised, and so shocked, just as with 9/11. It couldn’t possibly be about anything our government and economic institutions are doing. And the expected unsatisfactory response will be the same as then. More policing, more “war on terror”, now with increased emphasis on so-called domestic "extremists".
So, is it the beginning? Will it become a pattern, or is it just another “isolated” incident?
What direction will we let such incidents be used to lead us?
@Tyler: Please give us a "totally agree" flag. Also a flag for "really funny remark". I want to respond without adding to the length of the thread.
The vast majority of violence and hate speech in the past decade has been perpetrated by those on the left, and the Left reveals itself constantly through its projection onto others of it own pathologies. It's is really rather alarming that they have so little self-awareness, but I suppose that fascists rarely do. That's how you murder 100 million people in one century and still think that the problem was that "it just wasn't done right."
No. Your ideology leads inexorably to a place where you must kill others to convince them that you are right. I'm glad Loughner was a lefty, but we might still end up looking back at this as the first shot fired in the 2nd American Revolution. Were that to happen, the left won't like the results.
PD
"fascists" are "leftists"?
Then who are the "rightists"?
It is by such generalized and personally defined labeling that some call everybody they disagree with a "leftist" or a "liberal", and those over at Huffpo call everyone they disagree with a "teabagger" or a "right-wing Republican", regardless of the basis for disagreement.
Whether one thinks the US forces abroad only kill others in "defense", or that our government is "leftist",
one would be misapplying the terminology,
just as much as do those who wish to stamp out "extremism".
Such misuse of language typically makes one easy to manipulate in the 'divide and conquer' politics of the ruling establishment.
deleted - duplicate post when site went down
(don't know why, only hit save button one time)
deleted - duplicate post when site went down
Sadly, yes, lefty violence has never stopped. It has just been allowed to go under the radar and stay underground by the MFM.
I don't know about a 2nd American Revolution, but a media leftist was on MSNBC on Nov 8th and given a 10 minute segment proudly calling for an anti-American revolution after they got wiped out in the elections. The guy was not challenged by Ratigan who was sympatico with a lefty revolution for some reason.
Jared Loughlen bought his gun Nov 30th. The socialist rhetoric is not helpful.
Sucessful Troll is Sucessful
Krugman.
When your party of choice and the party you live with, think with breath with,are the cause for the foment of hate, its tough to blame someone else.
Let him who is without sin, cast the first stone.
Democrats and Republicans are the two wings of our one-party state.
Here come da judge
http://www.eutimes.net/2011/01/top-us-federal-judge-assassinated-after-t...
FBI: Jared Loughlen was an invitee to a Gifford event in 2007 and personally met her then. He was on team Obama
Jan 7th: Daily Kos site rails against Giffords, says she has a bull's eye on her back for voting against Pelosi as speaker
Obama: "Punish our enemies"
Beware idiots like Krugman politicizing violence for the progressive agenda. More MF lies from the MFM.
http://hillbuzz.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/screen-shot-2011-01-08-at-3-...
so what? a "bulls-eye" on an election district is hardly a call for assassination.
Compare it to some statements made by politicians regarding Julian Assange.
Neither Palin nor Kos appear to have violated any protected free speech.
What is pathetic is anybody trying to blame free speech for the shooting.
The obvious next step is to call for the prohibition of so-called politically incorrect "hateful" speech, and the arrest of "violators"
- which is already being done
I agree fully, just pointing out that mainly you only hear of Palin using the 'target', and by implication inciting violence like this. It's asinine, but being said out there.
gwar5
So you're against the "progressive agenda"?
The actual key progressive demands are to end the global militarism,
stop the bankster fraud and extortion,
and restore some balance to the current inequity of wealth and power,
Krugman notwithstanding, your opposition to those demands and implicit alliance with Obama (who also opposes all the above)
is misplaced and hardly admirable.
That's just a hedge; let's correct it:
1. End global militarism (and channel the money into domestic social issues that haven't gone away no matter how much money has been thrown at them. Education system has been strangled by unions. War on poverty proved that leftists' ideas on eliminating poverty only create more poverty. On and on. Unless I'm missing something, the left hasn't suggested ending global militarism and with the savings letting the people keep more of their own money.)
2. Stop the bankster fraud and extortion. (Not. When the left has had the power, they have only succeeded in making it even more insidious than it was before. Let's see - the leftists' recent reign has resulted in a _____ trillion dollars increase in the deficit. Fill in the blank. Be truthful.)
3. Restore the balance to the current inequity of wealth and power (It hasn't been balanced through a hundred+ years of leftist power, which tells me that when they hold the reigns they don't give a damn. The real problem is of course that leftists' ideas of restoration really mean forcing everyone in the world to take the work of their hands, put it in a big pot, take 99% for "administrivia" costs, and then divide the remaining 1% evenly among all of those who contributed, or not. Of course, that's always been accompanied by mass graves and midnight disappearances, now, hasn't it?)
BTW, not arguing that the right is any better. They accomplish the same goal of control, only they do it differently. Oh, and the body count is quite a bit less with the right, but only because as a rule their philosophy constitutes an absence of leftism.
I disagree with you that the Democrats are even “leftists”, much less “progressives”, any more than are the Republicans “conservatives”. As I already posted, I regard them as the two wings of our one-party government. Our key social institutions (mega corporations, MIC, Pentagon, the financial syndicate) are all secretive and autocratic. They all aim to benefit from global empire, controlling resources, and financial domination. The leaders are elitist and believe themselves entitled to wealth and privilege. As autocrats, they see democracy or open government as impediments to the setting of policy as they see fit.
?
From a previous post of mine:
“60% of federal civil servants work for the military, homeland security, or the CIA. Add to that the uniformed military, and unclassified political appointees.
A trillion dollars a year is spent DIRECTLY on militarism. Add to that private weapons, privately paid security, and overseas arms dealing.
The trillions of dollars handed out to the MIC and the financial racketeers are a primary cause of the inequity of wealth and power.
Professional engineers warn the roads, rails, electrical grid, sewage systems, dams, levees, water pipelines, and bridges have not been maintained, repaired, or replaced as needed. Trillions of dollars are needed just to bring the systems up to minimal standards of safety and usage. Trillions and trillions more to upgrade to world-class.
But we will continue to spend double the percentage GDP that others spend on similar healthcare in order to subsidize the insurance and health industries. We’ll allocate trillions more to keep financial speculators
afloat. We’ll spend trillions more to kill illiterate peasants half-way around the world, prop up drug mobsters, and enrich warfare merchants. We’ll build more prisons, persevere in the counter-productive drug “war”, and cut back municipal schools. We’ll pay for more NSA, TSA, and Homeland policing of ourselves. “
You argue against a “straw man” position that wanting the government to operate free schools and medical care means 99% administrative and 1% operation.
I do not believe just cutting taxes will be sufficient. Resources will still need to be pooled for social projects. Leaving social projects to the hands of corporations doesn’t quite do the trick.
I think we agree on much except what the economic policy should be, and I would like to have that hashed out publicly, democratically, with perhaps trial projects, and not by backroom deals as was done recently with healthcare.
For a whole OTHER Perspective on the connections between the shooter and the Congresswoman, consider this from Mike Rivero at "What Really Happened":
********************************
Open Gifford's Page and check for yourself. Lower left - take a look before this gets deleted!
Apparently, they knew each other!
Following the principle of Occam's Razor, and assuming this is not a cruel hoax (the link to Jared is only a week old), an interesting possibility suggests itself!
Loughner and Giffords knew each other. Jared Loughner twice worked for Gabrielle Giffords' campaign!
Gabrielle Gifford subscribes to Jared Loughner's YouTube channel, effectively linking her public YouTube channel to his YouTube channel. Why? Loughner's YouTube channel doesn't have much in it, and what is there might create some unpleasant concerns in the minds of Giffords' constituents. And Giffords only subscribed to one other channel, meaning this was not something she normally did as a matter of course.
One thing we can know from the subscription from Gabrielle Giffords' subscribing to Jared Loughner's YouTube channel; they were close, closer than the usual candidate/volunteer, close enough that Jared Loughner shared his YouTube channel with Gabrielle Gifford, and Gabrielle Gifford thought it important enough to link her own YouTube channel to.
So here is the "what if?" What if Jared Loughner misread Gabrielle Giffords' level of interest in him? What if he thought there was more than there really was? And what if, in the post-campaign season when Gabrielle Giffords had no more reason to spend any time with him, Jared Loughner felt jilted and betrayed?
I know it reads like a soap opera, but we do have a murder that fits the description of a crime of passion, involving two people with a demonstrated close relationship.
And if it should be revealed that we are dealing with a classic case of a wronged lover and infatuation gone deadly, all those political operatives like the Democrats, the gun grabbers, Southern Poverty Law Center, etc. trying to spin this tragedy to benefit their agendas are going to wind up looking like horses' rear ends!
The more I look at that YouTube subscription, the more sense this all seems to make.
Could be!
Could be!
**********************************
Anyone else seeing this connection between the 2 ??
SO WHAT IS A LINK ON GIFFORDS PAGE TO THE SHOOTER'S PAGE DOING THERE?
And if we can find it, why wasn't the esteemd media mentioned the obvious connection?
Go, Look at the link to her site in the previous message. Then let me know what you think.
You are correct about the link.
They apparently were at least political allies at one time. The reason for their falling out remains conjecture.
I suppose John Lennon's killer was a fan, as well as was Selena's killer, and were others.
But the truth behind the shootings will likely have as little to do with the consequences, no more than say who really burned the Reichstag in 1933 mattered on subsequent events.
Assassinate a Republican President in film it's called art...but in no way is inciting hate or deserving of calls for self-relection.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_a_President_(2006_film)
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/09/10/a_new_low_in_bush_hatred/
I agreer with Paul Krugman analysis and I want to add more to it:
The shooting was done in the week before the Republicans in the congress try to repeal the healthcare law, so that the wishi wshi domocratic members of the congress will be scared and will vote with the Republicans to protect their own lives and positions. That is why the right wing tea party chose a member of the congress which was considered to be a blue dog not someone considered radical.
I would like to remind the readers with the followiing:
1- That we have written our opinion in the Journal of Modern Socialism (www.journlaofmodernsocialsm.com) on Sept 30, 2010, published in its Oct 2010 publication that the stock market will resume its upward trend after the midterm election. No one made such prediction at the time. We gave good economic resons for that. That is exactly what happened after the election. Our readers followed that opinion at the time and made good investments. It is worth reading the article to get the right idea about the stock market, Modern Socialism and correct their views about socialism in gneral. The article was written by a qualified person, who has PhD in Engineering and MA in economics and vast experience in investing. He is old enough, tracked the stock market since 1965. By the way the journal was given tax exempt status by the IRS, so it is not a scary thing the authorities will track you if you read it!! If you want to donate money we will give you the tax exempt number to deduct the donation in your tax return.
2- Read in the same journal JMS, 16th publication, the letter which was sent to the US Attorney General requesting and explaining why the Justice Department should file a suitcase against the banks, investment companies and lending companies who caused the housing collapse. If the investors in mortgage backed securities and insurance companies can file a suitcase against them for fraud, why the Justice Department cannot file such a case on behalf of the 10 million homeowners subjected to foreclosures? What is US Justice Department for if it does not represent the interest of the public?
.