Discussion for article #243331
Fiorina, Cruz, Santorum–accessories to murder.
26 Likes
Yep! Sure sounds like a transgendered Democrat to me. /s
10 Likes
I don’t have any problem with someone being a lunatic. I do have a problem with that lunatic having unfettered access to firearms.
7 Likes
I saw thousands and thousands of Pro-Life supporters cheering when Dear shot up those people. It was well reported everywhere. Pro-Life people are accessories to murder, if not actual murderers themselves, which I’m sure most of them are, If I’m elected President, these people are gone. Yes, yes, they’re gone. Out of here! The good ones can come back. the good ones can come back. But they have to prove that they haven’t murdered people and that they will stay away from Planned Parenthood facilities. I am building a wall, a beautiful wall to keep people like Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee and all the other people who support these creeps out of here. And Trump. He gets a free boat ride on the Hudson. It will be beautiful.
20 Likes
“The man suspected of gunning down three people…”
Oh for fuck’s sake, there isn’t a single particle of doubt that Dear in fact did murder those people. The case against him is not circumstantial. If TPM can’t even summon the courage to correctly identify Dear as THE MURDERER of three people instead of resorting to the weasel words “suspected of,” I don’t see why I should subsidize it by becoming a Prime member. What in God’s name is TPM afraid of—that correctly identifying Dear as the murderer in advance of the trial is going to make FoxNews angry? That Dear is going to file a lawsuit for defamation? That Hugh Hewitt will write a mean column about TPM?
Jesus Fricking Christ. This is a perfect example of the old saw that a liberal is somebody too broadminded to take their own side in an argument.
- I’ve just signed up for a year’s Prime membership. I know where Josh and his staff stand on the larger issues, and that’s much more important than my deep irritation over this particular thing.
To continue my point: it was just a few days ago that Josh himself wrote these words (bold face mine):
"Everything I mentioned yesterday in this post (“Malign Hesitation”) seems only more relevant today. Colorado Springs police continue to refuse any comment on the possible motives behind the Planned Parenthood massacre over the weekend. For probative evidence, we know that he attacked a Planned Parenthood clinic, an organization which is a potent and pervasive symbol of the abortion rights debate across the country. We also have police sources telling journalists that Dear ranted about “no more baby parts” after being taken into custody. Absent some dramatic, game-changing new details, it’s very difficult to imagine this wasn’t what it looks like: a domestic terror attack targeting abortion rights - both a specific facility and to terrorize people trying to exercise these rights.
“Caution in the light of factual uncertainty is almost always a laudable stance for journalists and public officials. But from the beginning of yesterday’s attack on the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs there’s been an odd reluctance to state what appears to be obvious: that the attacker, now identified as 57-year-old Robert Lewis Dear, was motivated by extremist anti-abortion politics. The Denver Post headline states “Planned Parenthood shootings increasingly seem politically motivated” - and this after numerous accounts state that Dear was ranting about “no more baby parts” after his arrest, almost certainly a reference to the incitement earlier this fall over a doctored anti-Planned Parenthood sting video. Let’s remember, false claims and incitement about selling “body parts” were a staple of Fox News segments and tirades from Republican presidential candidates all through the fall.”
I completely agree with what I believe Josh’s main point is: the reluctance of the media to accurately label the nature of Dear’s actions is ridiculous and reprehensible. Josh was not saying that since a trial hasn’t occurred yet, we can’t know what Dear’s motivations were. He’s saying it’s goddamn obvious.
Why then would TPM itself be so reluctant to accurately label what Dear is?
7 Likes
Yes they were having tail-gate parties.
Like they used to say when I was in high school…" now tell me something I don’t know". Of course the guys an anti-abortion extremist. Arguments against that are premised on the need to shield folks that instigated him…GOP Presidential candidates, Ms, Fiorina in particular.
He did what he did because he was lied to by a conservative ( if you can call them that ) activist group that materially edited a video and because a presidential candidate lied about seeing a non-existent video. He did it because a large contingent of our Congress is using the debunked claims of Ms. Fiorina for political gain.
Hr did it because he was lied to by those he trusts and by his “sources of information”. It was all lies. Fabricated by folks pursuing power…and now 3 people, none abortionists, are dead.
5 Likes
Worst.BankRobber.Ever.
2 Likes
He looks for a way around anything he has to do and spends a lot of time planning revenge
There’s a lot of this going around…
2 Likes
There’s probably a lesson here, about riling up people with incendiary language and claiming video atrocities that you just can’t seem to ever actually point to…
but it’s almost certainly a lesson that won’t be learned (see “Giffords, Gabby”).
Easier to keep repeating the “Don’t retreat…re-load!” approach of Sarah Palin…
1 Like
With Sarah its more of “Don’t re-tweet…re-tweet with all caps.”
1 Like
Actually…using the terms “alleged” and “suspected” follow correct journalistic standards when reporting. I don’t have a problem with this. I am more concerned about sites that don’t try to adhere to such time-honored guidelines and best practices.
1 Like
Why were you attending GOP rallies?!?
Yes. Horse glue is a natural adhesive, not one of those manufactured toxic carbon-footprint-dirty types. Sounds like it has “greenie” written all over it.
Wait, so this attack was aimed Planned Parenthood and motivated by opposition to abortion? But I thought the perp was just a run of the mill transgendered left activist bank robber who took a wrong turn on his/her way to the getaway car.
4 Likes
In the large majority of criminal justice cases, there is some degree of reasonable doubt that can only be resolved through a trial. Obviously in those instances adhering to time-honored guidelines is reasonable and prudent. In this instance—where there isn’t a shred of doubt—adhering to such a standard is simply a refusal to accurately describe the facts. TPM isn’t a legal journal or a large circulation metropolitan daily newspaper—it’s a political blog with a clear and consistent stance on political issues, and these murders are political in every respect.
Michael Slager, the cop in South Carolina who was shown on video fatally shooting an unarmed Walter Scott in the back while Scott was running away from him, has not been convicted yet. Does that mean Slager should only be identified by TPM as “the alleged killer” of Scott? Augusto Pinochet died before he was convicted of any of the crimes he was accused of in Chile. Does that mean that it’s inappropriate to describe him as a murderer of massive proportions? That TPM should only refer to him as “suspected human rights violator?”
2 Likes
I have problems with lunatics being in power, gun or no gun; e.g., Cruz, Trump, Fiorina.
1 Like
Our legal system dictates innocence until proven guilty in a court of law despite the obvious. Media outlets have to watch themselves or they can be sued… it could also cause problems with jury selection …
1 Like
“The presumption of innocence” is what guides our legal system. If this were China Dear’s organs would already have been harvested.
2 Likes