Some idiot conservative told me that blaming Sarah was like blaming Lennon/McCartney

[lunamagica]

for the Mason murders...

He said that Manson saw "clear messages" to him from Beatles songs, and that just because "you and I" didn't see them didn't mean they were clear to him. I told him that "you, I and everyone" could see the crosshairs map with Giffords name on it, and could read the "Don't retreat, reload" comment; and that we didn't hear the messages to Mason on the songs because there were none.

He said that to Manson they were real, so it was the same thing.

How can you argue with someone who is so obtuse?

[EstimatedProphet]

1. Don't bother. Tell him he's beneath your contempt.

[kestrel91316]

2. I would have explained that blaming Sarah was like blaming Manson.

[Deep13]

15. Right, the ring leader who kept his own hands clean. nt

[JoePhilly]

3. Ask if he thinks Osama BIn Ladin videos result in attacks ...

Rush, Beck, Palin ... doing the same thing.

There is nothing violent in a Beatles songs, but there is actually violent rhetoric coming from the right wing.

[Canuckistanian]

4. The Beatles never put crosshairs on Sharon Tate

Nor did they even mention her or any of the others killed by the Manson clan.

[blondeatlast]

5. Exactly. nt

[Johonny]

9. There really isn't much violent tone in the album

Manson read it into it. But even the song revolution says

"But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out"

I think a better comparison is the political tone in Dallas before Kennedy was shot.

[Jack Bone]

12. Happiness Is A Warm Gun...

I'm not saying that I agree w/ the dimwit...but music can be intrepreted different ways.

[gmoney]

10. "You may be a lover but you ain't no dancer..." clearly means "Kill Sharon Tate."

geez, some people are so literal.

:sarcasm: SARCASM

[Goblinmonger]

6. We have ZERO proof

other than our consternation and hatred, that Palin's map was a message to this guy to do what he did. We, actually, have ZERO proof that he even SAW it.

[lunamagica]

7. But what we have is a map with crosshairs which included the congresswoman's

name; a message to "not retreat,reload" people saying for months that the graphic was inappropriate and calling for it to be removed (which happened an hour after the massacre); video of Giffords stating her concern to be named in the map. Whether the guy saw it ot not (and being that apparently he was fixated of the congresswoman it's hard to think he wouldn't be aware of something regarding her which made it into the news and was widely discussed, I find hard to believe he never saw it), the map was done with malice and it indeed incited violence (crosshairs, don't retreat, reload....how can such words be given a positive, or even harmless spin?)

I don't think anyone has said the map was "a message to this guy". But it was a message for people to take action against Democrats, which is exactly what happened

[Spoonman]

13. "I find hard to believe he never saw it"

I would be willing to bet a VERY large sum of money that I follow politics MUCH closer than he does, and I never saw it.

Please don't let your passion to defeat the right damage us as a whole. The knee jerk blame game rarely pays dividends.

[Johonny]

8. The tone was there regardless

maybe he never did. But any sane person looks at their actions and says you know talking about shooting and targeting of opponents, calling for second amendment solutions, having fund raisers at shooting ranges where your opponents initials are on the targets, those things create and atmosphere that tells people violence in politics is ok. I don't want to be the person that sends that message. That's not me and not what I'm about.

I think it's highly probable the person consumed a lot of the oddest and weirdest conspiracies our society is offering at the moment. The question is: as a person, a person about politics and in the media, do you want to be seen as selling violence as part of your campaign tactics or not. I think most sane people don't want to line up with the guy shooting 9 year olds. Most sane people say I don't like the violence talk, I get now why targets on opponents is the wrong message, I don't support violence as a political solution and part of normal campaigning. I think a sane politicians gets that it could of easily been her as me.

Just because A never saw B doesn't mean what B said or did was a good or intelligent thing to have done. An it certainly contributed to the atmosphere around the country. Because a former VP candidate is doing it, I can do it too. If you want to be a leader you have to accept the highs and lows that come along. Hence when Obama said the cop was wrong in that arrest of the guy breaking into his own house, he had to back track and apologize to the cop. It really takes 10 seconds to say "I was wrong, I get it now, I will not do this again, we don't support violence." It's so easy and they won't do tells you a lot about these peoples character.

[Spoonman]

11. "everyone could see the crosshairs map with Giffords name on it"

and yet, not "everyone" went out to took a shot at her!

With much, much regret, I have to agree with the conservative idiot on this one.

In addition, little lunatic Loughner has yet to say ANYTHING!

No one knows why he did it yet!

I have to go now, the "messages" are too compelling, I can't resist, I have no self control, I see crosshairs, I must go................ reload :crazy:

[Deep13]

14. "...All you need is to kill Sharon Tate! Everybody! All you need is to...."

I guess I missed that record.

[Harry Monroe]

16. You can't. Don't waste precious oxygen on these types.