<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Shall We Call It The Tucson Massacre Law?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 03:40:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.6</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Pteryxx		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497819</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pteryxx]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 03:40:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497819</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Y&#039;all may find this interesting:  &quot;Stochastic Terrorism&quot;.  Incite enough people, often enough, to create a favorable environment in which *someone* will snap.  If you think rhetoric and words are just words, then you yourself won&#039;t be shooting or curb-stomping people.  But what about everyone else?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/10/934890/-Stochastic-Terrorism:-Triggering-the-shooters]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Y&#8217;all may find this interesting:  &#8220;Stochastic Terrorism&#8221;.  Incite enough people, often enough, to create a favorable environment in which *someone* will snap.  If you think rhetoric and words are just words, then you yourself won&#8217;t be shooting or curb-stomping people.  But what about everyone else?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/10/934890/-Stochastic-Terrorism:-Triggering-the-shooters" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/10/934890/-Stochastic-Terrorism:-Triggering-the-shooters</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Greg Laden		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497818</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Laden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497818</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;em&gt;Thus far no one can find anything linking Jared Loughner, the shooter in question, to the Tea Party&lt;/em&gt;

Tyler, there isn&#039;t even a &quot;tea party&quot; ... your question requires the (nearly covert) erection of a straw man. There are no members of congress who are members of a political party called a &quot;tea party.&quot; It is an informal caucus created by Michele Bachmann with the motto (among other mottos) to arrive at gatherings &quot;armed and dangerous&quot; and to pay more attention to the Declaration of Independence than to the Constitution.  

I myself mostly avoid using the term &quot;tea party&quot; and instead use the more general term, &quot;teabagger,&quot; which I mean to be more encompassing of those who promote or carry out violence against centrists and liberals, and/or spout the usual white paranoid defensiveness, and so on.   This places our young man firmly in that category.  There is no official &quot;proof&quot; of his &quot;membership&quot; in some political party.  Your insistence that there be one is narrow minded and rather insulting.  

Personally, I&#039;m not interested in letting people pretend that they are not teabaggers when it is convenient, I&#039;m not interested in letting anyone pretend the teabaggers generally and the tea party in particular (such as it is) is not a racist, antii-progressive, violent-tending mess of morons.  

And, I am singularly unimpressed and deeply disappointed in the apparent need for people who self identify (or should I say self-aggrandize) as skeptics/atheists/rational thinkers to put on blinders, ignore context, ignore history, ignore what we have been seeing since the mock lynchings of the 08 election, put up a false sense of wonderment and questioning in the face of a blindingly obvious foot stomping screaming loudly in your face entity as though its existence needs to be re-proven every time it is mentioned.  What is the point of you doing this? Please explain and make it good. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Thus far no one can find anything linking Jared Loughner, the shooter in question, to the Tea Party</em></p>
<p>Tyler, there isn&#8217;t even a &#8220;tea party&#8221; &#8230; your question requires the (nearly covert) erection of a straw man. There are no members of congress who are members of a political party called a &#8220;tea party.&#8221; It is an informal caucus created by Michele Bachmann with the motto (among other mottos) to arrive at gatherings &#8220;armed and dangerous&#8221; and to pay more attention to the Declaration of Independence than to the Constitution.  </p>
<p>I myself mostly avoid using the term &#8220;tea party&#8221; and instead use the more general term, &#8220;teabagger,&#8221; which I mean to be more encompassing of those who promote or carry out violence against centrists and liberals, and/or spout the usual white paranoid defensiveness, and so on.   This places our young man firmly in that category.  There is no official &#8220;proof&#8221; of his &#8220;membership&#8221; in some political party.  Your insistence that there be one is narrow minded and rather insulting.  </p>
<p>Personally, I&#8217;m not interested in letting people pretend that they are not teabaggers when it is convenient, I&#8217;m not interested in letting anyone pretend the teabaggers generally and the tea party in particular (such as it is) is not a racist, antii-progressive, violent-tending mess of morons.  </p>
<p>And, I am singularly unimpressed and deeply disappointed in the apparent need for people who self identify (or should I say self-aggrandize) as skeptics/atheists/rational thinkers to put on blinders, ignore context, ignore history, ignore what we have been seeing since the mock lynchings of the 08 election, put up a false sense of wonderment and questioning in the face of a blindingly obvious foot stomping screaming loudly in your face entity as though its existence needs to be re-proven every time it is mentioned.  What is the point of you doing this? Please explain and make it good. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Paul Revere		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497817</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Revere]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:46:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497817</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;em&gt;Smitty, nobody cares about what British people say&lt;/em&gt;

Hahahahahaha]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Smitty, nobody cares about what British people say</em></p>
<p>Hahahahahaha</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TTT		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497816</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TTT]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:43:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497816</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Smitty, nobody cares about what British people say, and their political speech is totally unrelated to this topic--nice attempted dodge though.  Whenever liberals point out the growing pro-murder, pro-domestic-terrorism tenets of the conservative movement, cons tend to sputter out a retort &quot;but but but there was that movie about @ss@ssin@ting Dubya!&quot;  Yes, there was that movie.  It was a British movie, made with British money for British audiences.  ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smitty, nobody cares about what British people say, and their political speech is totally unrelated to this topic&#8211;nice attempted dodge though.  Whenever liberals point out the growing pro-murder, pro-domestic-terrorism tenets of the conservative movement, cons tend to sputter out a retort &#8220;but but but there was that movie about @ss@ssin@ting Dubya!&#8221;  Yes, there was that movie.  It was a British movie, made with British money for British audiences.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Greg Laden		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497815</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Laden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:41:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497815</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Smitty, you linked to a picture.  I don&#039;t see any evidence in this picture of a &quot;left&quot; condoning something.  If that&#039;s Sarah Palin hung in effigy, I think that&#039;s disgusting.  Just as disgusting as the two or three hundred or so Obamas hung in effigy or similarly depicted at rallies during the election.  

See, here&#039;s what&#039;s wrong with your argument:

1) Nobody is condoning violent inciting behavior on the side of the so called &quot;left&quot; (or center or right).

2) The vast, vast majority of violence inciting rhetoric and behavior is on the right, and is in fact, the halmark of the Tea Party, which is why I call those who carry out violent acts against centrists and liberals &quot;teabaggers.&quot; It&#039;s what &quot;teabagger&quot; means to me (as far as I can see the term is otherwise somewhat ambiguous).

3) There is no equivalence between the two (or more) &#039;sides&#039; and reference to such equivilance as though it existed is ... exactly what a teabagger would do.  Which makes YOU a teabagger.  

Understood? 

Regarding the video, I didn&#039;t bother watching it but I&#039;ll assume Stephanie has that right. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smitty, you linked to a picture.  I don&#8217;t see any evidence in this picture of a &#8220;left&#8221; condoning something.  If that&#8217;s Sarah Palin hung in effigy, I think that&#8217;s disgusting.  Just as disgusting as the two or three hundred or so Obamas hung in effigy or similarly depicted at rallies during the election.  </p>
<p>See, here&#8217;s what&#8217;s wrong with your argument:</p>
<p>1) Nobody is condoning violent inciting behavior on the side of the so called &#8220;left&#8221; (or center or right).</p>
<p>2) The vast, vast majority of violence inciting rhetoric and behavior is on the right, and is in fact, the halmark of the Tea Party, which is why I call those who carry out violent acts against centrists and liberals &#8220;teabaggers.&#8221; It&#8217;s what &#8220;teabagger&#8221; means to me (as far as I can see the term is otherwise somewhat ambiguous).</p>
<p>3) There is no equivalence between the two (or more) &#8216;sides&#8217; and reference to such equivilance as though it existed is &#8230; exactly what a teabagger would do.  Which makes YOU a teabagger.  </p>
<p>Understood? </p>
<p>Regarding the video, I didn&#8217;t bother watching it but I&#8217;ll assume Stephanie has that right. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Stephanie Z		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497814</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephanie Z]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 02:58:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497814</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[smitty, got a source for the photo you link to? Some context maybe?

As for the video, it was taken down as soon as the producers realized anyone was taking it at all seriously, as soon as anyone complained. An apology was also issued here: http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure

This is like what Palin, Bachmann, Angle, etc. have done how?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>smitty, got a source for the photo you link to? Some context maybe?</p>
<p>As for the video, it was taken down as soon as the producers realized anyone was taking it at all seriously, as soon as anyone complained. An apology was also issued here: <a href="http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure</a></p>
<p>This is like what Palin, Bachmann, Angle, etc. have done how?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TTT		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497813</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TTT]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497813</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Smitty, nobody gives a shit about what British people say, and British politics are entirely irrelevant to this discussion.  This is just like when wingers, pressed on the pro-domestic-terrorism statements and actions of their own kind, reach for false equivalence by citing a British mockumentary film about W&#039;s assassination.  If you can&#039;t find any evidence of American liberals being as objectively pro-violence and pro-terrorism as American conservatives (and you can&#039;t, cos they aren&#039;t), then just say nothing instead of cluttering the topic with offtopic global trivia.  Jolly bad show old sport, wotwot?    
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smitty, nobody gives a shit about what British people say, and British politics are entirely irrelevant to this discussion.  This is just like when wingers, pressed on the pro-domestic-terrorism statements and actions of their own kind, reach for false equivalence by citing a British mockumentary film about W&#8217;s assassination.  If you can&#8217;t find any evidence of American liberals being as objectively pro-violence and pro-terrorism as American conservatives (and you can&#8217;t, cos they aren&#8217;t), then just say nothing instead of cluttering the topic with offtopic global trivia.  Jolly bad show old sport, wotwot?    </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: smitty		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497812</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[smitty]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:18:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497812</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If the rifle cross hairs are violent imagery, how does the Left condone this:&lt;a href=&quot;url&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/83471770.jpg?v=1&amp;c=IWSAsset&amp;k=2&amp;d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA548EE94FB3B604C62D3793AEB58F7DE4A0CCCF388C9B41D5076E30A760B0D811297&lt;/a&gt;?

Oh, and those lovely extreme environmentalists across the pond think this is humorous:&lt;a href=&quot;url&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfnddMpzPsM&lt;/a&gt;
It&#039;s one thing to be &quot;pro-choice.&quot; But the children in this gory Leftist propaganda piece are around the same age as the poor little girl who was murdered in Tucson. Let&#039;s get our priorities straight by first considering legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against children under age 18. Those blue-bloods look down their snooty noses at us, whilst chuckling at the slaughtering of school children. &quot;No Pressure! Just do as we say if you value your short little lives. But no matter! We can kill 2 birds with one stone. The planet being overpopulated and all...&quot;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the rifle cross hairs are violent imagery, how does the Left condone this:<a href="url" rel="nofollow">http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/83471770.jpg?v=1&#038;c=IWSAsset&#038;k=2&#038;d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA548EE94FB3B604C62D3793AEB58F7DE4A0CCCF388C9B41D5076E30A760B0D811297</a>?</p>
<p>Oh, and those lovely extreme environmentalists across the pond think this is humorous:<a href="url" rel="nofollow"> </a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfnddMpzPsM" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfnddMpzPsM</a><br />
It&#8217;s one thing to be &#8220;pro-choice.&#8221; But the children in this gory Leftist propaganda piece are around the same age as the poor little girl who was murdered in Tucson. Let&#8217;s get our priorities straight by first considering legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against children under age 18. Those blue-bloods look down their snooty noses at us, whilst chuckling at the slaughtering of school children. &#8220;No Pressure! Just do as we say if you value your short little lives. But no matter! We can kill 2 birds with one stone. The planet being overpopulated and all&#8230;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Greg Laden		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497811</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Laden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 21:58:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497811</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s my blog, you can only do that with my permission. I am in charge here. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s my blog, you can only do that with my permission. I am in charge here. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Stephanie Z		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497810</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephanie Z]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 21:26:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/09/shall-we-call-it-the-tuscon-ma/#comment-497810</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;d be honored, Warren. :)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d be honored, Warren. 🙂</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
