More evidence that Loughner not 'crazy' or 'deranged'

[Synthaholic]

Have you ever found any proof that he was influenced by "hate speech"?

NOTE: Wishful thinking isn't proof.

I wouldn't be finding that proof, if it exists. The experts who will be evaluating Loughner will make that determination.

Will you accept their findings without spinning it?

Yes. But when they find no evidence of right-wing influence, you will not.

You want so badly for it to be true. And leftists see what they believe.

If you say so.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't wonder. He exhibits the same lout personality as his heroes.

Don't pussy foot around come out and say it. Who was his heros? Man up own your statement.

You are tiresome, Rebecca.

Don't pussyfoot around cyndie man up tell us who his heroes were.

 

[Ravi]

Sane or insane people can be influenced by rhetoric.

Just sayin...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

sane or insane people can be influenced by rhetoric.

Just sayin...

OK, but what did he listen to that should be easy to prove.

 

[sangha]

sane or insane people can be influenced by rhetoric.

Just sayin...

OK, but what did he listen to that should be easy to prove.

But did he really listen to the music? You can't prove that.

 

[Sheldon]

I think when most people say he's insane they mean "normal, non-instain people don't shoot up dozens of other people at a political rally". Legal insanity and clinical insanity is another issue.

Someone can suffer from a mental disorder, and still know how to operate google and think ahead btw. So the premise of this thread doesn't really work.

I guess you didn't follow my first thread about this subject. The extreme rightwing made the argument that he was not influenced by violent rhetoric and images from Right, because he is an insane or deranged gunman. Like they are mutually exclusive.

But I'm thinking you've already made up your mind about what the influences were, regardless of the facts of the case so far, and it's just about reinforcing your as-yet unsubstantiated opinion.

Have fun with that.

Where have I done that? Please point it out, and then we both can see it for the first time.

I think I commented on his creepy mugshot in that thread, but no I didn't follow it. Right after the incident I tried to avoid most of those cesspools.

And no, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Who knows how or what influences whacked-out people? HE may not even know what it was. At this point a lot of the speculation is just red meat in an already emotionally charged topic.



If you haven't made up your mind about the influences of this guy, then I apologize for making the assumption.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

sane or insane people can be influenced by rhetoric.

Just sayin...

OK, but what did he listen to that should be easy to prove.

But did he really listen to the music? You can't prove that.

His friends said he did. They never mention anything conservative about him,

 

[Liability]

I figured you'd be too much of a coward to answer honestly.

Unlike you, skanky, I was honest. When we "chat" like this, that's the way it always is. Me = honest. You = lying skank.

Your fraudulent "question" demanded to know why I directed my comment "against women in general." Dishonest premise, i.e., unsurprisingly, you lied.

I did not do any such thing, as you knew when you chose to lie.

Instead, as you knew, my comment was pointed solely at you.

I love exposing your endless and abundant dishonesty, Lying Skank.

No need to thank me. Always my pleasure.

It is a shame you are not introspective enough to know that generalizing the behavior of women is an insult to women in general.

One wonders how much you have been influenced by the rightwing talking heads: Beck, Rush, etc.

It's a shame you can't post without relying on dishonesty as you do so often.

The truth is (I realize hearing any part of "truth" will burn you, but I like the truth and I don't care for you, so if it burns, learn to cope, Skanky) I didn't "generalize" anything, you dishonest stain.

Once again, I was quite specific in fact.

Did you take your Midol yet, Skanky?

By the way: there is no need to wonder if you've been influenced by the rampant dishonesty of left wing media. You are their mark. You are a dutiful useful tool.

 

[Liability]

Are you claiming that Rightwingers all over USMB haven't been saying that violent rhetoric from the Right had nothing to do with it?

You use English like a jackhammer on a baby grand.

Listen you intentionally evasive and deliberately distorting scumbag, I was saying no such thing. And I'm not now. Nor am I saying the contrary, shit hole.

SOME liberals here at USMB, unlike you, ARE capable of intellectual honesty.

You should not over generalize.

If you ever care to TRY (for what may be the first time in your miserable life) to be both honest AND accurate, it is time to start properly employing modifiers and qualifications.

SOME liberals have intellectual honesty and integrity in debate here at USMB.

SOME right wing rhetoric has engaged in violence-laden imagery.

SOME of what many liberals point to as "violent rhetoric" from the right wing was never violent rhetoric in the first place.

Until you learn to regularly use proper qualifications for your assertions, much of the silly stuff you spew is a waste-land full of bullshit -- devoid of logical value.

So, are you claiming that Rightwingers all over USMB haven't been saying that violent rhetoric from the Right had nothing to do with it?

You truly are a dumbass.

Again, I reject your cheap and obvious effort to distort what I have said, dipshit.

Many folks of conservative political inclination here at USMB have most assuredly denied that there is ANY evidence to support the left-wing generated canard to the effect that any right-wing political discourse had anything to do with Jared Loughner's behavior.

You can try to rephrase that all you wish, but your lies are powerless to alter the substance, you lying twat.

Loughner MAY have been crazy.

Loughner did what he did for reasons that YOU sure as hell do not know.

YOU sure as hell have absolutely NO evidence of any kind that he ever so much as heard a Rush radio broadcast or one by Beck, etc.

With the possible exception of medical and psychological experts attending to the fuckwad, nobody has any idea (yet) what did motivate Loughner.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yeah, except I never claimed something. And DiveCon is too fucking stupid to bother explaining to him again. He'll just forget it again tomorrow. That's why I told DiveCon to fuck off, while explaining it to Sheldon. Sheldon isn't an idiot.

liar

I realize I just told Ernie that you are too fucking stupid to waste my time re-explaining things to you, but I'll try again: I have not attributed Loughner's actions to wingnut hate speech. I have only pushed back on the notion that "He's deranged - rhetoric had NOTHING to do with it!!!11!"

Of course, you are welcome to go find a post of mine that blames Poor Sarah. Maybe that fruitless search will keep you busy all day, preventing you from polluting the board with your putrid brain droppings for at least today.

Now fuck off.

You position is that rhetoric had nothing to do with it, but you still push back against the idea that rhetoric had nothing to do with it.

 

[daveman]

I wouldn't be finding that proof, if it exists. The experts who will be evaluating Loughner will make that determination.

Will you accept their findings without spinning it?

Yes. But when they find no evidence of right-wing influence, you will not.

You want so badly for it to be true. And leftists see what they believe.

If you say so.

No perp walk for Palin, Skippy. Sorry. Not gonna happen, no matter how badly you want it to.

 

[DiveCon]

Yeah, except I never claimed something. And DiveCon is too fucking stupid to bother explaining to him again. He'll just forget it again tomorrow. That's why I told DiveCon to fuck off, while explaining it to Sheldon. Sheldon isn't an idiot.

liar

I realize I just told Ernie that you are too fucking stupid to waste my time re-explaining things to you, but I'll try again: I have not attributed Loughner's actions to wingnut hate speech. I have only pushed back on the notion that "He's deranged - rhetoric had NOTHING to do with it!!!11!"

Of course, you are welcome to go find a post of mine that blames Poor Sarah. Maybe that fruitless search will keep you busy all day, preventing you from polluting the board with your putrid brain droppings for at least today.

Now fuck off.

no, you fuck off, because you have done just that and several people here in this thread have SEEN it
so i will not waste MY time jumping through your stupid fucking HOOPS to prove it

 

[DiveCon]

January 26, 2011
Tucson Suspect Studied Assassins, Officials Say

By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN and MARC LACEY

TUCSON — Jared L. Loughner, the man accused of opening fire outside a Tucson supermarket on Jan. 8 in what the authorities consider an attempted political assassination, researched famous assassins, the death penalty and solitary confinement on the Internet before the shooting, an official close to the investigation said Wednesday.


Mr. Loughner, 22, pleaded not guilty on Monday to three counts of attempted murder in connection with the shooting, which left six people dead and 13 injured. Representative Gabrielle Giffords, Democrat of Arizona, was shot in the head but survived. Additional charges, including murder, are expected.


Mr. Loughner checked himself into a Motel 6 on the evening before the attacks and was on his computer until the wee hours, authorities said. An analysis of his Web searches showed that he was busy researching hours before the shooting, which took place shortly after 10 a.m., an official said.


“He was looking at Web sites related to lethal injection and Web sites about famous assassinations,” said an official close to the investigation.

The Washington Post first reported the Internet searches on its Web site on Wednesday afternoon.

OK let's entertain that thought for a second. He's not insane. What is your point?

The question of the influence of wingnut hate speech on Loughner has not been determined, so it cannot be discounted. Yet Regressives on this site have dismissed it as even a possibility.

still holding out that hope they will find something, eh?
moron

 

[DiveCon]

Sane or insane people can be influenced by rhetoric.

Just sayin...

only if they actually see or hear it

 

[Synthaholic]

You use English like a jackhammer on a baby grand.

Listen you intentionally evasive and deliberately distorting scumbag, I was saying no such thing. And I'm not now. Nor am I saying the contrary, shit hole.

SOME liberals here at USMB, unlike you, ARE capable of intellectual honesty.

You should not over generalize.

If you ever care to TRY (for what may be the first time in your miserable life) to be both honest AND accurate, it is time to start properly employing modifiers and qualifications.

SOME liberals have intellectual honesty and integrity in debate here at USMB.

SOME right wing rhetoric has engaged in violence-laden imagery.

SOME of what many liberals point to as "violent rhetoric" from the right wing was never violent rhetoric in the first place.

Until you learn to regularly use proper qualifications for your assertions, much of the silly stuff you spew is a waste-land full of bullshit -- devoid of logical value.

So, are you claiming that Rightwingers all over USMB haven't been saying that violent rhetoric from the Right had nothing to do with it?

You truly are a dumbass.

Again, I reject your cheap and obvious effort to distort what I have said, dipshit.

Many folks of conservative political inclination here at USMB have most assuredly denied that there is ANY evidence to support the left-wing generated canard to the effect that any right-wing political discourse had anything to do with Jared Loughner's behavior.

You can try to rephrase that all you wish, but your lies are powerless to alter the substance, you lying twat.

Loughner MAY have been crazy.

Loughner did what he did for reasons that YOU sure as hell do not know.

YOU sure as hell have absolutely NO evidence of any kind that he ever so much as heard a Rush radio broadcast or one by Beck, etc.

With the possible exception of medical and psychological experts attending to the fuckwad, nobody has any idea (yet) what did motivate Loughner.

So, are you claiming that Rightwingers all over USMB haven't been saying that violent rhetoric from the Right had nothing to do with it?

It's really a simple question. Either they have or they haven't. Pick one.

 

[Synthaholic]

liar

I realize I just told Ernie that you are too fucking stupid to waste my time re-explaining things to you, but I'll try again: I have not attributed Loughner's actions to wingnut hate speech. I have only pushed back on the notion that "He's deranged - rhetoric had NOTHING to do with it!!!11!"

Of course, you are welcome to go find a post of mine that blames Poor Sarah. Maybe that fruitless search will keep you busy all day, preventing you from polluting the board with your putrid brain droppings for at least today.

Now fuck off.

You position is that rhetoric had nothing to do with it, but you still push back against the idea that rhetoric had nothing to do with it.

No. Why haven't you read for yourself?

My position is that it has yet to be determined. The wingnut position is that "rhetoric had nothing to do with it - he's a deranged gunmen".

How many more times will I need to explain this to you 'smart conservatives'? Give me a number, so I can plan for a time when you all will finally get it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sane or insane people can be influenced by rhetoric.

Just sayin...

only if they actually see or hear it

Let'em keep going with that argument DiveCon. You know just like they know that his friends has reported that he listen to Anti Flag the anti government group. If listening to something will cause you to start shooting people at least blame something that has been reported that he has listen to.

 

[Synthaholic]

Yes. But when they find no evidence of right-wing influence, you will not.

You want so badly for it to be true. And leftists see what they believe.

If you say so.

No perp walk for Palin, Skippy. Sorry. Not gonna happen, no matter how badly you want it to.

Trolling and grasping on a Sunday afternoon. Not a good use of your time. Why don't you go down to the commissary and fill your cart with more taxpayer-subsidized Twinkies, Ding-Dongs, and Ho-Hos.

 

[Synthaholic]

liar

I realize I just told Ernie that you are too fucking stupid to waste my time re-explaining things to you, but I'll try again: I have not attributed Loughner's actions to wingnut hate speech. I have only pushed back on the notion that "He's deranged - rhetoric had NOTHING to do with it!!!11!"

Of course, you are welcome to go find a post of mine that blames Poor Sarah. Maybe that fruitless search will keep you busy all day, preventing you from polluting the board with your putrid brain droppings for at least today.

Now fuck off.

no, you fuck off, because you have done just that and several people here in this thread have SEEN it
so i will not waste MY time jumping through your stupid fucking HOOPS to prove it

Liar.


Now run along. You have quite a bit of fucking off to do!

 

[Liability]

So, are you claiming that Rightwingers all over USMB haven't been saying that violent rhetoric from the Right had nothing to do with it?

You truly are a dumbass.

Again, I reject your cheap and obvious effort to distort what I have said, dipshit.

Many folks of conservative political inclination here at USMB have most assuredly denied that there is ANY evidence to support the left-wing generated canard to the effect that any right-wing political discourse had anything to do with Jared Loughner's behavior.

You can try to rephrase that all you wish, but your lies are powerless to alter the substance, you lying twat.

Loughner MAY have been crazy.

Loughner did what he did for reasons that YOU sure as hell do not know.

YOU sure as hell have absolutely NO evidence of any kind that he ever so much as heard a Rush radio broadcast or one by Beck, etc.

With the possible exception of medical and psychological experts attending to the fuckwad, nobody has any idea (yet) what did motivate Loughner.

So, are you claiming that Rightwingers all over USMB haven't been saying that violent rhetoric from the Right had nothing to do with it?

It's really a simple question. Either they have or they haven't. Pick one.

My position has been explained very clearly. Your inability to grasp the import of basic English is entirely on you.

As I noted before SOME conservative folks here at USMB have argued (perhaps with something less than precision and clarity) that because Loughner might have been crazy, it is ridiculous to say that any right wing political discourse is likely to have motivated him. And, more importantly, there remains exactly zero evidence that any right wing poitical discourse motivated him. In facvt, there's no evidence out there that he ever listened to guys like Beck or Rush or even to Gov. Palin.

So your pointless is not only illogical, it is baseless.

You are making no point. If some conservative guy somewhere has argued that Hitler was actually a nice guy, that is NOT something which anyone with integrity could fairly or logically attribute to all (or most) other conservatives.

You remain an abject fail, Simpleholic.