Cleo's Mom

I must have missed where you said you also opposed the 30 round ammo. Fair enough. As to my saying automatic vs semi-automatic, well those who are gun savvy like you would know a Glock was semi automatic. Those who don't know about guns wouldn't be focused on that but on the rapid fire and big magazine clip. And I will do some research, but I suspect that the NRA, whose lobbying power is second only to the Chamber of Commerce, supports sale of them to civilians as well as hollow point bullets. What the majority of people want in terms of gun laws or gun safety means nothing compared to the power of the NRA. What they want, they get. Name me one person running for any public office that dares say they want more gun laws or restrict gun ownership and I will show you someone who lost. Not even the most liberal candidate will say that. As for DADT, just use all the arguements for keeping it but change the word gay to black and it's the same arguments that were used against integration of the military.

My son and son-in-law are absolutely obsessed with fantasy football. It has been elevated to a sacrament for them. There is much smack down talk in their emails to all involved. I have never watched the superbowl or any football game - pro or college - ever. When my son was in second grade I used to buy him the NFL sweatsuit outfits based on the colors of the teams I liked. I remember liking the 49ers. Didn't they have like an old gold and red? His friend's mom liked it too and got him the jacket. He had Miami Dolphins - I liked their helmet. And I liked the Rams helmet, too. Other than that I had no interest. Maybe you guys should give up your methods and go with us ladies who use successful methods. LOL.

I don't know anything about sports. Nothing. But I thought you'd find this amusing (maybe not). My son runs a college bowl football pool every year. You pick which team you think will win then you assign a score. If your team wins, you get plus that score. If your team loses you get minus that score. When the games are over - highest score wins. About 27 people play, mostly men. Now they guys pour over their selections and debate, etc. I takes me about 30 seconds. Why? Because I pick blue states over red, northern states over southern and I never, ever pick a Texas team. When my son sees my selections he groans about what terrible picks I have and how this or that team will never win. Guess what? I won last year and this year. Not too shabby for a selection process. Go democrats!! (Just trying to interject a little levity - don't take it seriously)

No, those of us on the left support teachers and public servants. I would regardless of whether I or my husband had been one. Was it the left or the right who opposed the repeal of DADT or gay marriage? Was it the democrats or republicans? So, it is not a giant leap to conclude that one of the most conservative republicans, Cheney, would oppose rights for gays. As far as having something affect your life and changing your viewpoint - if is something that can be extrapolated to a larger group and have validity, then I see nothing wrong with it. For example, if you get pulled over for speeding and get a ticket and then develop an anti-cop mentality forever - that is not valid or reasonable. But there is a lot of hypocrisy in this, though. I only will look at the big picture if something affects me personally. Liberals can do that without something affecting them personally. I have never been unemployed but I can support extending unemployment benefits. But I wonder how many were opposed to it until they became unemployed. I have never been without health insurance but I can support universal health insurance. I can support government run healthcare (medicare) without receiving it. That's a big difference between the left and the right. Those on the right have to affected personally, those on the left can see the benefit of something without being affected personally. I don't know where I said anything to you about your views on gays. I don't even recall you ever posting anything about gays, so please show me where I have. As to saying it was automatic vs semi-automatic - that is picking on a minute point and missing the big picture. It's like a wife saying to her husband "I am divorcing you because you had affairs with 5 women" and he says "No, it was only 4". As to fact checking - well you've already established that you didn't before you posted the job loss figure. So I made a mistake, big deal. I saw a man shoot a semi-automatic Glock and he shot 14 times in about 7 seconds. So to unload a clip with 30 bullets would take about 15 seconds. Again, no civilian needs to have ammunition like that. Would this guy have still shot Gifford had this ammunition been illegal? Yes, but there might not be as many other casualities. Because it was when he was reloading that some unarmed people in the crowd subdued him, first by hitting him over the head with a folding chair and then getting him to the ground, kicking his gun away and taking the extra magazine clip from him.

So, it was semi-automatic. That doesn't change the point I was making. No civilian needs to be able to buy a clip for a semi-automatic gun that shoots 33 bullets in a short period of time. The only reason would be to kill as many people as you can in the shortest period with a weapon that is easily concealed. So, I oppose the sale of these types of clips to civilians.

One of the biggest causes of state's financial woes was the loss of so much of their investments in the stock market during the bush years that was to fund pensions. Another big cause is the increased need for government services due to so many being unemployed. And a third reason is that with so many being unemployed there are fewer paying taxes. The best thing to reduce deficits - federal and state- is to get people working. Not cutting services. And the best way we can get people working is to get corporate America to get their asses off the 2 trillion in assets that they are sitting on. There is consumer demand out there. But corporations don't want to hire. Government has gone pretty much as far as they can to improve conditions for economic growth - like allowing businesses to write off 100% of capital improvements. Imagine if I could do that when I put a new roof on my house? And there have been many, many small business tax breaks and incentives. It's time for Wall Street to man up and contribute to this economic recovery that served them well, starting with the bailout and continuing with their obscene CEO bonuses.

I refer to your opinion about teachers as the "Cheney syndrome". If Cheney didn't have a daughter who was a lesbian his opinions of gays would be to shoot them at sunrise. Those on the right have made it open season on public employees, unions in general and teachers especially as the cause of all our state financial woes. So, I suspect that if your wife wasn't a teacher you would concur with their opinions. We all protect our own. We only look out for ourselves. If we have it it's because we worked hard and deserve it and did it all by ourselves. If you don't have it it's because you are lazy, shiftless, don't deserve it, and besides - you spend your money on big screen tv's....because I know someone who..... and btw, I totally support teachers, nurses, firefighters and police and believe them to be the most unappreciated and underpaid workers we have for the work they do. I applaud your wife's work.

I don't know how you can extrapolate that this wasn't his first run in with the cops to THAT being good news for gun rights activists. He didn't have a criminal record which is why he bought his gun legally. So effectively, he was that "law abiding gun owner" that I refer to as only being one shot away from being a criminal. In his case it was over 20 shots. And even though he made disturbing comments in writings, you cannot arrest a person for what they might do. He was able to buy a magazine for his automatic Glock weapon that shoots 33 bullets in rapid fire. Our law enforcement officers have guns that only shoot 12-15 rounds in a clip (except for SWAT, etc.). There is no other reason for a civilian to be able to buy a magazine that fires 33 bullets in a matter of seconds other than to kill a lot of people quickly. And don't give me that lame "target practice" excuse. Many in law enforcement are against much of what the NRA supports - like hollow point bullets sold to civilians, and assault rifles. Responsible, common sense gun owners will support common sense gun laws. Those who don't are called supporters of the NRA.

Ted Rall, Frances Fox? Who even heard of these people? This is the best you can do. Lame. Look at the audience of the people I quoted. In addition, Ted does not call for violence - he was simply saying that historically there are 4 ways to change the government, violence being the last and least desirable. He would prefer people take their money out of the stock market or quit paying their mortgage. Wow! Really violent stuff. And as for Frances Fox: So where are the angry crowds, the demonstrations, sit-ins and unruly mobs?” she writes. “After all, the injustice is apparent. Working people are losing their homes and their pensions while robber-baron CEOs report renewed profits and windfall bonuses. Shouldn’t the unemployed be on the march? Why aren’t they demanding enhanced safety net protections and big initiatives to generate jobs?” [Emphasis added]Those are the questions that frame what can best be called a roadmap for revolution. And it’s not long before those questions give way to directions. The first instruction: get angry. Her questions reflects more on the tea party movement - angry crowds, unruly mobs, demonstrations and getting angry. Again, no violence. I have posted numerous specific things that those on the right, who reach millions a day, say that refers to guns, violence or killing. You have not commented on any of them. I, the media, smart people - we all know where the hateful rhetoric is coming from. So, therefore, I am done going back and forth with someone who is in obvious denial and making weak attempts to deflect from the facts.

ariscus quote: And another statistic they put up on the screen was about obama bragging that 1.3 million jobs were created in 2010, and that he failed to mention that over 8 million were lost, so that puts us at a net loss of over 6 million jobs last year. Speaking of math skills, I am still waiting for your math to show the net loss of 6 million jobs last year (2010). And that $300/week unemployment figure was an average that I have heard over and over again in the media. Each person's unemployment is tied to the salary of the job they had. If your one friend makes $1800/month, then it is above average. That's still only $21,600 a year. Certainly not enough to support a family without another paycheck.

More hate speech with references to killing coming from the right: Some very nice quotes for a book on Eliminationism. Here's a few taken from his page. Rush Limbaugh: "I tell people don’t kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus -- living fossils -- so we will never forget what these people stood for." Ann Coulter: "We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee. ... That's just a joke, for you in the media." Melanie Morgan: "I would have no problem with [New York Times editor Bill Keller] being sent to the gas chamber." "The Political Insight": Let's start with the following New York Times reporters and editors: Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger Jr. , Bill Keller, Eric Lichtblau, and James Risen. Do you have an idea where they live? Go hunt them down and do America a favor. Get their photo, street address, where their kids go to school, anything you can dig up, and send it to the link above. This is your chance to be famous -- grab for the golden ring. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev.: While praising the efforts of American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, Gibbons accused liberals, movie stars and song makers of "trying to divide this country." "I say we tell those liberal, tree-hugging, Birkenstock-wearing, hippie, tie-dyed liberals to go make their movies and their music and whine somewhere else," he told the crowd, according to the Elko Daily Free Press. He then said it was "too damn bad we didn't buy them a ticket" to become human shields in Iraq. Rep. Peter King: And Joe Wilson has no right to complain. And I think people like Tim Russert and the others, who gave this guy such a free ride and all the media, they're the ones to be shot, not Karl Rove. Bill O'Reilly: Where does George Soros have all his money? Do you know? Do you know where George Soros, the big left-wing loon who's financing all these smear [web]sites, do you know where his money is? Curaçao. Curaçao. They ought to hang this Soros guy.

If the use of the term neocon and the meaning that I used it as is good enough for Maureen Dowd (a successful writer for the New York Times), then it is good enough for me. I didn't make it up - it has been used in the mainstream media, as I have used it, and I will continue to use it. When words are used in our lexicon as times change, they often take on new meanings. The way you use the term liberal, whether in reference to me or in general, is meant to be an insult. And it hardly fits the definition I posted, so you just made up your own definition (wanting everyone to be dependent on the government) Just like calling dailykos crackpot. I find more accurate info on there than any other site and often it beats mainstream media to the story. As to dismissing your map post. Like I said, two lame maps. Big deal. But what you ignored was all the very specific information I posted, naming names. You have not offered any proof that the majority of the hateful, gun metaphor, anti-government rhetoric comes from the left. You have not offered the names and quotes from anyone on the left who has said the equivalent to what I posted from the right. Because you can't. And if you go back and look at my posts and yours - you will see that the more I post factual information that you can't refute, the more you attack me personally. That was a trick of pattygreen's too. When she had nothing, she attacked me personally. And you have nothing.

Big deal, you found two maps with "targets" when liberals used the same example as neocons (and for your future reference, I will be using that term in the same context and meaning as Maureen Dowd) and the extremist on the right. And btw - who was the person behind this map? I name names. I challenge you to find any public figure from the left, liberals or democratic party who have either run for office, are in office or are just a celebrity like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sharon Angle or Michelle Bachman to name a few. Sarah Palin had targets on a map of those democratic districts she was targeting. One of them was Gabrielle Giffords. She spoke about this on MSNBC and said her district was in the crosshairs of Sarah Palin's target. She said words and images have consequences. Her office was vandalized. She's been shot. So, why don't you tell her and her family what Palin did was okay? Palin has also called for her followers to reload not retreat. She often uses gun metaphors. Why? If her message is good enough, why the need for the not so thinly veiled reference to guns and targets? Sharon Angle called for second amendment remedies and wouldn't explained what that meant when pinned down. Michelle Bachman wants her constituents armed and rising up against what she calls the wrong doings of goverment. Here is some hate speech from the right: Glenn Beck: -Hillary Clinton is a stereotypical bitch -Cindy Sheehan a tragedy slut -he said he was thinking about killing Michael Moore and wondered if he could do it himself or have to hire someone. Michael Savage: Here's what he said about girls from the private Branson School who have been serving meals to San Francisco's homeless; The girls from Branson can go in and maybe get raped...because they seem to like the excitement of it. There's always the thrill and possibility they'll be raped in a dumpster while giving out a turkey sandwich. About Obama he has said - he is an Afro-Leninist, and I know he's dangerous, and he's a muslim, a dictator, a terrorist, Obama hates and is raping America. O'Reilly on the rape and murder of 18 year old Jennifer Moore in New York - He called her moronic. After all, he said she was walking alone at night in a mini skirt and bare midriff. Then there was those on the right who published the address of a democratic congressman's brother by mistake - I think it was like Palladino. Well, someone went to the brother's house, thinking it was the congressman's, and cut the gas line on his gas grill. This man had a wife and 4 children. In typical neocon fashion, you and others are trying to go on the offensive and change the focus. We certainly wouldn't want to dig too deep at the extreme right wing movements in this country and who funds them and what their real agenda is. Nice try, but it won't work. The hate speech, the hateful rhetoric, the constant bashing of the government, making it the enemy, the constant references to guns - ALL OF THIS IS COMING FROM THE RIGHT, NOT THE LEFT. And you know it, and I know it and you can try to deflect and come up with a few examples, but I think most people in this country aren't confused as to where this hateful, divisive dialogue is coming from. And certainly not me!!!

This is what I am talking about (from an expose on the Rolling Stone website and dailykos): Another Ohio Democrat, Steve Driehaus, clashed repeatedly with Boehner before losing his seat in the midterm elections. After Boehner suggested that by voting for Obamacare, Driehaus "may be a dead man" and "can't go home to the west side of Cincinnati" because "the Catholics will run him out of town," Driehaus began receiving death threats, and a right-wing website published directions to his house. Driehaus says he approached Boehner on the floor and confronted him. "I didn't think it was funny at all," Driehaus says. "I've got three little kids and a wife. I said to him, 'John, this is bullshit, and way out of bounds. For you to say something like that is wildly irresponsible.'" Driehaus is quick to point out that he doesn't think Boehner meant to urge anyone to violence. "But it's not about what he intended — it's about how the least rational person in my district takes it. We run into some crazy people in this line of work." (emphasis mine) Driehaus says Boehner was "taken aback" when confronted on the floor, but never actually said he was sorry: "He said something along the lines of, 'You know that's not what I meant.' But he didn't apologize." That bears repeating: "It's not about what he intended -- it's about how the least rational person in my district takes it." And confronted with the obviousness of that appeal, the John Boehners of the world don't apologize. They just keep the steamroller of hate running right along through Crazytown until somebody inevitably gets hurt. There's been a lot of jostling between the right and left, each trying to paint the murderous gunman as a member of the Other Side. The truth is that the murderer is a paranoid libertarian whackadoo, closer to the Right than to the Left, but not fitting neatly into either mold. He's much more Alex Jones than Glenn Beck or any Lefty equivalent. John Cole perhaps said it best: The point we have been trying to make for the last couple of years is that Republicans need to stop whipping up crazy people with violent political rhetoric. This is really not a hard concept to follow. There are crazy people out there. Stop egging them on. Exactly. This is not about what the shooter is or is not, from a purely political point of view. He's a nutcase. What matters is that when irresponsible charlatans like Sarah Palin plant surveying targets bullseyes on members of Congress, that has an effect on the least rational people in those districts. Particularly on those least rational individuals given to potentially violent paranoia. This is the Becking of America: the promotion of hate speech to provoke the irrational into violent conduct, while giving the promoter plausible deniability. After all, that's not what they meant, right? The conversation between Driehaus and Boehner, quoted presciently by Taibbi last week, needs to be retold again and again in the wake of the Giffords shooting. Especially in the context of the paranoid lies and deceit that lay like a dark shroud over the healthcare debate at the time, it is exemplary of everything that is wrong with the modern Right. If the John Boehners of the world are not deliberately shamed into changing their rhetoric and their behavior, this sort of tragedy will happen again and again, with devastating consequences.

I posted this in the post-surgery forum but this is a more appropriate site. Did anyone else have this problem and if so, how did you solve it? So, here is my situation. I was thin all my life growing up and had an enormous appetite. It always took a lot of food for me to feel satisfied. I ate when I was hungry, stopped when "full", didn't gain weight and didn't think about food. That all ended in my late 20's when the genes of my obese family kicked in. The weight started coming on, especially after 2 pregnancies. I did all the diets. They all left me hungry. So fast forward 30 years and now I'm obese. I get the LAP-BAND® in Sept. 2008. In January 2006 I started my own diet, plus the 6 month pre-op diet and 2 week liquid diet before and after the LAP-BAND® had me losing 60 lbs. My surgeon wanted me to lose another 10-15 lbs in the 3 weeks after surgery with no fill. That should have been red flag #1. That is an unrealistic expectation for anyone, plus I didn't have a lot more to lose at that point. Red flag #2 was when I found out he lied about the size band he put in me. He said it was 10cc but I found out it was 4cc. His first fill was 2cc's and his second fill was 1cc. This one caused me many problems - pain, reflux, heartburn, pressure. He blamed me. It was a case of well, if you drink that and it does that then don't drink. After he did an upper GI and saw what a mess I was and how I was too tight he called me in immediately for a slight unfill. At this point I had lost about 75lbs. He was never satisfied with this and gave me the come to Jesus talk when I hadn't lost from one appt. to another. That should have been red flag #3. So, I got a second opinion and that is when I found out about the lies, etc.. And then I switched to this new surgeon. He was very complimentary about my weight loss and had a supportive attitude. He told me I was too hard on myself (something my late husband used to always say to me) I want to make this very clear: At no point in my LAP-BAND® journey from no fill to 3cc's did the band ever, ever for one second take away my hunger or provide me with satiety. Did it make it difficult to eat a lot at one sitting? Yes, but that is different. I was still very much unsatisfied. The inability to eat more and the feeling of satiety are two different things for me. In hindsight, I think the sleeve would have been a better choice for me - it takes away the stomach and reduces those hunger hormones which I think are my two biggest problems. But, I digress. So last December I got stuck so bad that I had to go to the ER and spend the night in the hospital. I have been through a lot of painful things but nothing like this. I couldn't even talk I was in so much pain. Dilaudid (sp?) didn't even help. All the fill was taken out of my band and that is where it is now. So, what am I supposed to do? Getting a fill will not help with the hunger and just make it more likely to cause a stuck episode and when I tell you the fear I have of this - it is overwhelming. I cannot even begin to tell you how painful that episode was. I am sure getting shot couldn't have been more painful. So, what do I do? I exercise every day. I count calories and keep a food log and I have the same hunger as I have always had - before the band. So, what do I do? I am 59, my insurance won't pay for the sleeve. But I did all this and now fear gaining weight back. So far I haven't but it is a struggle every day. Every day. So, you can see that the band doesn't work as it should for everyone. And I followed all the rules. Still do. So, what should I do?

Exactly, and he also spoke about those who don't speak English. He was obviously mentally deranged and regardless of whether he was influenced by the hate speech coming from the right - we must have a dialogue in this country about how those words affect people. Words matter. We hold bullies accountable when their taunting words lead to a young person's suicide. We need to hold those on the right accountable for the words they choose and the message they are sending.

Neocon Coup at the Department d'État By MAUREEN DOWD Published: August 06, 2003 WASHINGTON Let others fight over whether the war in Iraq was a neocon vigilante action disrupting diplomacy. The neocons have moved on to a vigilante action to occupy diplomacy. The audacious ones have saddled up their pre-emptive steeds and headed off to force a regime change at Foggy Bottom. President Bush staged a Texan tableau vivant last night, playing host at his ranch to the secretary of state, his wife, Alma, and his deputy, Richard Armitage. Mr. Bush wanted to show solidarity after a Washington Post story on Monday that said that Colin Powell, under pressure from his wife, said he would not be part of a second Bush term, nor would Mr. Armitage. Mr. Bush might be trying to signal his respect for Mr. Powell, but the president is not always privy to the start of a grandiose neocon scheme. The scene was reminiscent of last August in Crawford, when Mr. Bush dismissed press ''churning'' that the administration was on the verge of striking Iraq, saying, ''When I say I'm a patient man, I mean I'm a patient man and that we will look at all options and we will consider all technologies available to us, and diplomacy and intelligence.' We all know how that turned out. When the neocons want something done, they'll get it done, no matter what Mr. Bush thinks. And they think Mr. Powell has downgraded the top cabinet post into a human resources job, making nicey-nice with the U.N. and assorted bad guys instead of pursuing the neocon blueprint for world domination through what James Woolsey calls World War IV (World War III being the cold war.) Countering the Post story, Mr. Powell's posse claimed that neither the secretary of state nor his deputy had ever said they intended to step down, and charged that the neocons were leaking a canard to turn the two men they consider lame doves into lame ducks. ''This is the revenge of the neocons for two months of bad news, looking like they're falling all over themselves in Iraq,'' said a Powell confidant, noting that Alma Powell was furious she had been dragged in. In The Post, nearly all of the names of those who could move up if Mr. Powell moves out are Iraq hawks: Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz and Newt Gingrich were mentioned as candidates for secretary of state; Wolfie, Cheney Chief of Staff Scooter Libby and Condi deputy Steve Hadley, who may be radioactive after the uranium mistake, were mentioned for national security chief. Why don't you debate Maureen Dowd on her use (the one I use) of the term neocon? Now that would provide amusement for my friends.

Actually you do make up the definition of liberals every time you use that term - to mean wanting more people to become dependent on the government, etc.. And I was called a communist by tea party extremists when I spoke at my republican congressman's town hall meeting and presented evidence (from the Washington Post) about the real cause of the deficit. The media uses the term neocon all the time. I am glad I could provide amusement for your little whippersnapper friends.

For me, and I suspect others, I use it in the more pedestrian way - meaning the new wave of conservatives who are more to the right and extreme than what moderate conservatives have been. It was/is a term used by the media to refer to many in the bush administration and I'm sure they weren't referring to your textbook definitiion. I could ask the same of you when you toss around the term liberal in the most perjorative way: Liberal (Websters) capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives

I think I saw where one person said he was left leaning in high school. That was a long time ago. People change. As to who is connecting him with right wing racist and anti-semitic organizations - well that would be law enforcement who are looking into possible connections based on his writings. I already posted this and you ignored it, which is another defense tactic used by neocons.

Where have I said that I want to make more people dependent on the government? I would like everyone to have a level playing field. The opportunity to get health care, go to good schools, get a good education, live in a safe community, find a job that pays enough to live on, etc.. But that is not the case. And I have no problem with helping the least among us. So you know one person who is collecting unemployment that averages about $300/week. Big effin deal. If he can live off of that, great. Most can't. Everyone claims to "know someone". And lots of things happen to people through no fault of their own. Someone loses their job and their healthcare, then a medical crisis ensues, and they can't pay their bills and they lose their home. They might be getting unemployment, maybe not. But being unable to pay for medical bills is the number one reason for foreclosure. But the neocons want to repeal healthcare. And where are all these jobs the unemployed are supposed to get? Oh, I know - a minimum wage job which , btw,might not be around long if the neocons have their way (they are investigating whether the minumum wage is constitutional). Yeah, the unemployed and those making minimum wage - there what's wrong with our country. That's the convuluted thinking of those on the right. Our legal system blamed the bartender. They believe his actions were partly responsible for the drunk driver. I believe that words have consequences and those that feed the paranoia of the mentally deranged who don't need much provocation are partly responsible. We didn't have all this hatred of the government, all this division until we had the 24/7 hate tv and radio and public figures who promote it, and that Arizona sheriff agrees with me and sheriffs are not known to be liberals. I have listed many, many examples on other threads in this forum of absolutely outrageous, offensive and often dangerous lies that they say. Their listeners don't fact check. The guy who killed the three police officers was armed to his teeth, complete with a bullet proof vest. He believed Obama was going to take his guns. Now where would he get that idea? Not from any liberal. The only person I have seen mention the tea party was Gabrielle Giffords father. Her office window was smashed the day after she voted in favor of the healthcare bill. There have been other acts of violence against democratic congressmen, which again, I have posted on other threads in this forum. I am unaware of any attacks on republican congressmen's offices. Your long post is all of the place with ideas about the shooter. I wouldn't put much stock in what the Business Insider says since they got it wrong about his military service. He was rejected by the military. I have posted enough to convince me that this guy hated the government and was mentally deranged. Oh, and btw, he had the chance to meet and ask Gabrielle Giffords an irrational question which she didn't answer to his liking - after which he said she was stupid and unintelligent. It is typical of neocons to look for cover,offer explanations and other nonsense and go on the offense to deflect from what has happened. OMG, it couldn't possibly be the result of some right wing, mentally unbalanced person who hated and feared the government - I mean we never see THAT happen.

Hardly the postings of someone on the far left. Anti-government, anti those who don't speak English, etc.. I can't trust the CURRENT government... That comes right out the the right wing playbook. By Robert Anglen and Brennan Smith, The Arizona RepublicThe 22-year-old suspect in the shooting of U.S. Rep Gabrielle Giffords and others at a Tucson grocery is Jared Loughner, who lives in the same city.On MySpace and YouTube web pages, a man who identifies himself as 22-year-old Jared Loughner posted anti-government messages that talk about mind control and suggested he will soon be adopting a new consciousness. <P class=inside-copy>SHOOTING: Congresswoman shot, at least 6 others killedGABRIELLE GIFFORDS: Who is she?PHOTOS: Images from Giffords' career, the Jan. 8 shootingVIDEO: Latest on Tucson shooting "Goodbye," Loughner posted on his MySpace account at approximately 5 a.m. Saturday. "Dear friends ... Please don't be mad at me." Photos on MySpace show a close-up picture of an automatic handgun sitting atop a book or paper titled United States History. This picture is accompanied by several videos posted to Loughner's Youtube account, including one of a masked man burning a U.S. flag and another with the words, "Don't trust the current government, listener!" It is unclear if Loughner is the person burning the flag in the video. Additional pictures show a coded message, Loughner on the street and a close-up of his face. <P class=inside-copy>ON THE WEB: Local coverage from AZCentral.com On both the MySpace and YouTube web pages, Loughner mentions his concern over literacy rates and the fact that few people speak English. He also talks about his distrust of the government and suggests that anyone can call anyone a terrorist. "I can't trust the current government because of fabrications," Loughner wrote in a YouTube slide presentation. "The government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar."