Candlelight Vigil for Tucson Victims

Liberals are the judas goats of fascism. These people want to disarm the working class. That's not progressive. That's reactionary.

100 protesters? Where'd you learn to count, guys? There was around 3 dozen - maybe 50 all night. And the counter-protesters were fewer in number than the crowd ginned up by the Fresno County Democratic Central Committee, but not by much.

As usual your reporting is inaccurate and biased.

The "protesters" didn't even have the fortitude to call their presence a protest. And they were afraid to defend their actions to the media...any media.

The liberal clowns manipulating the AZ shooting for political gain are despicable. You should be ashamed to be associated with this gross display of opportunism and bottom-feeding.

that connects Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sarah Palin or the Tea Party to any of this

it would be nice if people would work from the bottom up, and address Loughner as an individual, and figure out the extent to which he was politically motivated in relation to his apparent mental disorder, than expropriate him, and the people that he shot and killed, in the service of such a political agenda

it is, quite frankly, a disservice to the victims, and will do little to further understanding as to why this incident occurred

it does, however, rather fortuitously assist the Democratic Party in its fight against the Republicans over control of the instruments of power in the US

Republicans and Democrats are the same thing, they both support the State and it's violence. "Divide and Conquer" is an age-old, highly effective strategy and you are all falling for it; hook, line, and sinker. Let's focus on the real enemy and realize that State Socialism isn't much better than State Capitalism, the State is the problem people.

''lefties'' dont read mein kampf!!

Yes, you working class hero you, because of all of the guns the working class has, they are stronger now than they have ever been. Those 270 million guns in the US are certainly keeping the powerful in check, as made obvious by the dwindling wealth gap in the US and the increasing strength of unions. Right? What freakin' dream world do you live in? Besides, in your fantasy civil war, class war, whathaveyou, do you really think the muskets of the poor can stand up to daisy cutters? All they'd be is a nuisance picking off a few soldiers or oligarchs here and there. The only way weapons would work for a working class revolution is if the working class were incredibly organized, disciplined, and committed - and if the working class has its act that together, then weapons become meaningless because the working class can shut down and seize the means of production through general strikes and so forth.

As for "nothing to date," the exact problem with our collective reaction to these atrocities is that in the end we look at each one as simply a unique aberration, missing the forest for the trees. Violent political rhetoric from the right is not harmless - Gabby Giffords herself last year spoke out against Sarah Palin's gunsights map. Beyond the violent rhetoric, something like 30,000 people a year are killed by guns - over half are self-inflicted, but still. Who knows how many die from stabbings and beatings? This country freaked the fuck out over 3000 deaths in New York in 2001, but barely bats an eye when well over ten times that many are killed every single year by guns and other means. The problem is that we OVER-individualize all of these deaths and fail to connect the dots. We are a hyper violent culture (to no positive socio-politically effect even - see above paragraph), and THAT needs to be dealt with. To solve the larger problem is no disservice to the fallen - indeed it honors them the most by attempting to prevent future pointless deaths such as theirs. To worship the dead with blinders on, is to assure there will be more like them.

The senseless killings by a lunatic in Arizona are tragic and my heart goes out to the families of the victims.

However, for the Central Committee of the Democratic Party of Fresno County to organize a vigil over the killings is extremely hypocritical.

After all, it is the Democratic Party leaders that have expanded the war in Afghanistan and continue the occupation of Iraq. It is the neo-liberal Democrats that have continued and expanded the Bush administration attacks on the Constitution and our civil rights. For a murderous, blood-soaked imperialistic party to take advantage of the killings in Arizona to further its own corporate agenda is beyond disgusting.

Of course, the Zionist murderers that infest the Obama regime will use the killings to continue their assault on the first and second amendments.

as I posted elsewhere, in relation to a post about Palin:

Without question, Palin is a very scary person in terms of her conduct and the violent imagery of her public statements, and for that reason alone, she should be condemned, as they say about voting "early and often". But, with that said, interviews of people who knew Loughner paint a picture of someone who was seriously mentally disordered. I conducted certification hearings for mentally disordered people in California for many years, hearings that would decide whether they could be held involuntarily for a specified period of time (14 days), and my experience is that it is unrealistic to expect them to process information and develop a political motivation for their actions in a straightforward way, when they are as impaired as Loughner appears to have been. Indeed, it may be unrealistic to expect clear, linear explanations of the political values and decisions of much, if not all, of the populace. In other words, a search for an easily reduceable political explanation for Loughner's actions is likely to be futile, and may well, upon subsequent discoveries, backfire against those liberals, like Keith Olbermann and Jane Hamsher, who have sought to do so (Hamsher is backing away somewhat now).

From what we know about Loughner, there are serious questions about the relationship between his apparent mental disorder, his fascination with obscure far right ideologues, such as David Wynn Miller, who believes that the government manipulates us by controlling grammar, popular culture (he apparently liked a controversy death metal song that celebrates shooting people) and the lack of resources to provide treatment for him, none of which, with the possible exception of Miller, fits into the liberal narrative. And, of course, there is the question of the gun culture in places like Arizona, where weapons possession and use is integrated with a bizarre sense of personal peril at the hands of unseen, outside forces, creating the potential for eruptions of violence as experienced in Tucson. I am familiar with northern Arizona (my mother retired there), and it is quite frightening, but it is something that has culturally developed there over many decades, and, again, is not easily reduceable to people like Palin, Beck and others, even in the amorphous sense (so far, I haven't seen anything that indicates that Loughner has any familiarity with them and their politics). We can argue as to whether Palin is an expression of it or intensifier of it, but that does little to improve our understanding of what happened in Tucson, and may happen again elsewhere. The threat was there before Palin, and may, sadly, be there after she has departed the political scene. She casts a light on a more dangerous, more deeply ingrained aspect of American culture that both political parties persist in ignoring.

[As for "nothing to date," the exact problem with our collective reaction to these atrocities is that in the end we look at each one as simply a unique aberration, missing the forest for the trees. Violent political rhetoric from the right is not harmless - Gabby Giffords herself last year spoke out against Sarah Palin's gunsights map. Beyond the violent rhetoric, something like 30,000 people a year are killed by guns - over half are self-inflicted, but still. Who knows how many die from stabbings and beatings? This country freaked the fuck out over 3000 deaths in New York in 2001, but barely bats an eye when well over ten times that many are killed every single year by guns and other means. The problem is that we OVER-individualize all of these deaths and fail to connect the dots. We are a hyper violent culture (to no positive socio-politically effect even - see above paragraph), and THAT needs to be dealt with. To solve the larger problem is no disservice to the fallen - indeed it honors them the most by attempting to prevent future pointless deaths such as theirs. To worship the dead with blinders on, is to assure there will be more like them.]

Sure, and, maybe, we should instead be focusing upon the President, the Vice-President and the Pentagon, all of whom are responsible for legitimizing violence and training thousands upon thousands of people how to use guns, rifles and weapons of all kinds, instead of just singling out right wing commentators and media personalities like Palin, Beck, Limbaugh and others? Maybe, just maybe, that's a big contributor to gun violence in the US?

Oops, I forgot. This was a vigil sponsored by the Fresno County Democratic Committee. Never mind.

All Liberal supporters of Congresswoman Giffords should note that she doesn't share your call for outlawing the private ownership of Guns . (i emphasize ''private '' because i have heard very few liberals condemm the increasing miltarization of Police depts . thruout the US )
According to the 1/11 NY Times she stated a few months ago , in response to the many death threats that she had received from right wingers , that she owned a Glock and ''I know how to use it ''.
Unfortunely she was unable to do so on 1/8 . Both the right and the need to defend oneselves is more apparent than ever , whether it be for Abortion providers, Union organizers or even (barely ) liberal elected officials .
There's nothing ''Ultra Left '' about that . Just recognizing our harsh political/social reality .

or as randall robinson points out, ''america'' is the problem. its character. not ''individual events'' that spring up ''out of nowhere'' .

Supporting gun control doesn't necessarily mean outlawing all private ownership of guns. Gun control advocates have called for background checks, and have succeeded in enacting some legal requirement for background checks (with gun shows being a big loophole), but the fact that someone with as clear a record of mental disturbance as this gunman had could so easily buy a gun shows that the standards for disqualifying a gun buyer are very minimal. It is reasonable enough to say that some red flag should be raised when someone like that tries to buy a gun. I agree with things that have been said about the state and both parties promoting violence with war and militarism, but I don't see that as a reason to oppose sane regulation of gun sales to individuals.

Giffords has been identified as a blue dog democrat in the mainstream media, not as a liberal. She is more liberal on some issues than on others. In supporting gun rights she is probably representing her constituents, since she comes from a very gun-toting part of the country.

Sorry folks, but the narrow minded liberal vs. conservative BS has got to go. We have to realize, as someone else said, that they are both the same. Liberals and conservatives expand wars, support Wall Street and Corporations, stand for a strong state, and are capitalists. Open your minds to something besides MSNBC or Fox. Realize that capitalism and the state both preserve their power through violence. Because of that, it should be no surprise that we will live in a violent society in which violence, like the Tucson incident, will occur (thats sociology 101). Its not about gun control or the 2nd amendment. Its about oppression. The state and capitalism are the most oppressive institutions on the globe. WAKE UP PEOPLE