I just came back from checking to see what the Freepers were saying about the speech. It seems that it was horrible that people cheered and applauded.

I need a shower.

I knew as soon as I heard the first applause the freepers were going to jump all over it, like they still do when referencing the Wellstone memorial. I admit that I did not feel entirely comfortable hearing cheers when someone named someone who died. But we Americans have so few ways to express our overwhelming emotions.

One bright spot that has emerged from this horrible tragedy is Gifford's intern Daniel Hernadez. Wow, that guy has a bright, gay, hispanic future in the D party!

I'll bet the ancient Romans felt the exact same way...

...and a well-deserved one. :rrose:

I thought Rep Giffords was a conservative Democrat............I know I heard that........maybe from Rachel or Thom Hartman or Randi Rhodes............

now I have to try to figure it out............

-------------
I do find it a bit disturbing to suggest that any member of the House is an 'inconsequential politician'. I am sure that no one in her district thought she was inconsequential before she was shot. Giffords is a 3 term House member.

----------
I watched part of the memorial service and I was a bit skeeved at all the cheering and clapping and hooting and hollering that went on................and it was during the entire service, not just during Obama's words to the country.

Well, you know. As the right moves further to the right, the new definition of "progressive" becomes the old definition of "centrist".

I actually don't know anything about her. I've heard she was pretty gun-rightsy. I'm not sure how she felt about Brewer's antics. I do know she was in favour of HCR.

She probably was pretty centrist. But you know, that's just a few steps away from filthy commie to some people. ;)

No, I have to say that interpretation hadn't occurred to me. However, after reading your post I gamed it out in my head on my drive home from work. It doesn't work for me for a number of reasons:

1) The perpetrator is all wrong. Circumstances have handed any pol wanting to drum up fear in the body politic the *perfect* foil--namely Muslims.

2) The actual deed is wrong. Yes, six people died but there could have been a much higher body count.

3) Giffords survived. If this were a conspiracy she would have died because from a propaganda perspective she is worth far more dead than alive.

What possible benefit would come out of this for a politician or 'the government'? None. If someone is going to take such a HUGE risk as a false-flag operation, there has to be a payoff. There's no payoff to this. Discussion of gun control ( which goes nowhere) and distraction? Not nearly enough.

If the shooter had been a suicide bomber and if said suicide bomber had conveniently been in Pakistan or along the AfPak border area and immediately following there were calls to invade Pakistan then I could see an argument for a false-flag operation. But given the above, I just don't see it. The risks of being caught so outweigh any potential benefits that there's no way someone would green light the kind of operation you are alluding to.

Cheers
Aj

Blue Dog and self-described "former Republican"

I actually wanted to add this--and I know this sounds cynical but here goes anyway.

There is no level of gun-violence mayhem that I would put past the American public. Every year, every YEAR, enough people are shot and killed in this country to make up the body count of a decent-sized guerilla war or partisan insurgency. In fact, I would go so far as to say that suicide-bombings not-with-standing, there are hardly any excesses of the most vicious, brutal, hard-fought civil war that cannot be easily and enthusiastically duplicated by an ordinary American walking into a building with his Constitutionally protected firearm.

Cheers
Aj

You know it's really sad but so true. I'm pretty liberal. If there were a way to do it *democratically* I would be in favor of socialism but I don't see any way to have democracy and real nationalization of the economy. So I'm a social democrat. But things have tilted so far to the right that my positions end up being rather centrist.

I've heard (and read) European Leftists say that there is no American Left because positions that seem Left in America would be of the Right in Europe. I'm not sure if I agree with that but it is a sign of how far Right this country has turned.

Cheers
Aj

She is a Blue Dog Democrat... an acknowledged sub organization of the Democratic party... many of whom refuse to pay dues to the Democratic platform. She is, unlike most Blue Dogs, pro-choice and very supportive of LGBT rights. She is a member of the House LGBT Equality Caucus...

The only stated position for the Blue Dogs is fiscal conservatism. I think that most of them tend to be "socially conservative" though... whatever that means (to me a more appropriate term would be socially backwards!). She says she was once Republican...

I can see that. I mean, for as long as I've been old enough to understand "how things work" and "what things mean" your Republicans have been to the right of our Conservative Party of Canada and your Democrats have also been to the right of our Liberal Party of Canada.

Mind you, our Conservative Party is also moving to the right at a maddening/saddening pace - although not quite as maddening/saddening as your Republicans.

(By the way, I don't consider the Liberal Party to be Leftist at all. I consider them centrist.)

Tucson Tea Party founder says that the Tea Party is also a victim in the shooting

Oh, and also that it's partially Gifford's fault that the shooting happened at all.

I know, I was beginning to wonder what took so damn long to get to the "well, it was Giffords own fault..." meme.

Cheers
Aj