Interesting that the author is complaining about what the MSM fails to mention about Dorner's writings, but he himself leaves out Dorner's praise of Tebow, his praise of Bill Cosby for talking truth to black people, praise for Dennis Miller and others who are deemed to be either in the Con camp or not quite in the Liberal camp. Also left out is the notion that he didn't vote, and he wants either Hillary or Christie to be the next president. It doesn't sound like he has a well-formed political position. Of course, even if he was FDR's grandson, a member of Code Pink and Greenpeace and the ACLU, he would still be a vengeful, murdering, crazy guy.
That's why we should debate and discuss and reasonably contribute to any discussion. I've seen nothing here that proves he was or was not an Obama worker; do you have something... or just an empty denial? The rush to be first is a terrible pressure. Good thing we can take our time to debate and discuss.... if we choose to. So all we really know is that that source was inaccurate, I think. Sadly, there is very little evidence offered-- mostly a bunch of predictable opinions.
Should I ever murder a handful or a dozen people, I'm sure they'll dig into my past and you'll see the answer is "NOT." BTW, I surfed around the FVAP.gov site (Federal Voter Assistance Program) which is for military personnel and it does have a pulldown menu for party affiliation with the following disclosure: "To vote in primary elections, you must enter your political party affiliation. To change your political party affiliation, indicate your new party preference. Political party affiliation is not required if only requesting absentee ballots for general elections."
Are you sure? Every person who commits multiple murders is an Obama campaign worker until proven differently.
how could you have? your original post asking if this was a coincidence or not had no link. if you were asking if the info was true, that's one thing. you beleived it the moment you saw it and brought up specifically why no shooters were NRA members or conservatives. you said you "thought" it was authored by a soldier on a blog (source?) the examiner article posted on the first page refuting your info was penned by Keith Darling-Brekhus, there's no reasonable discussion to something that is completely made up and shared on the Internet.
I don't know why anyone argues with giddyup. He has a long and extensive history of ignoring reality.
If you guys want to assume that this thing was fabricated from whole cloth, I cannot stop you. As I said, I Googled it and Snoped it. Nothing turned up so I posted it which made me think there was some merit to it. Obviously, you have concluded differently and I think I know why. I'm willing to challenge the accuracy of it while you seem unwilling to even consider some accuracy in it. The one critical piece posted does give some pause to some aspects of the claims but offers no counter proof although its author is willing to jump to a self-satisfying conclusion.
Here's the thing. There is little proof that any of it is true... But even if it were all true it doesn't prove causality. There is no link to that. So who cares if it was all true. It means nothing and since there is no way to know if it's all true it means less than nothing.
I don't find it ironic, as a nutty mass shooter and a political bomber are completely different animals. McVeigh wasn't some crazy dude who fueled his rage by fantasies of wielding power over the lives of others and was helped along in his illness by easy access to guns that would let him live out the fantasy. He was a crazy dude who wanted to make a political statement. He planned, took his time, selected his means, and executed it. I don't think he really minded if he got caught, since that would just give him a platform for his views. His act was much more cowardly than that of a mass shooter who probably knows they are going to get shot at as soon as the police arrive... suicide by cop. There's a big difference between disturbed mass shooters and disturbed political bombers (right and left). Good police work may not do much for the former, since they fly under the radar, but decent gun control laws would. Gun control laws wouldn't affect the latter much, but good police work and intelligence gathering up front is the only way to attempt to prevent something like OK City.
The truth in either direction is hard to ferret out. I never said it proved causality and, in fact, I said myself it didn't. I don't agree that it means nothing or less than nothing. The fact remains that the press is all too eager to tag something dirty or horrible as Republican or Republican-inspired if they can. If any of this is true and none of it has come to light, that is newsworthy. It's not right just to assign blame when it fits your agenda.
FranchiseBlade in particular had no problem using the Loughner shooting to rip conservatives, so for him to now protest a rush to judgment is the height of hypocrisy.
You are misremembering. What I was doing after Giffords got shot, was talking about toning down the rhetoric, not passing blame on a group.
So a random thing that isn't even necessarily a fact and not causal in it's relationship isn't that worthy of discussion.
