There is no comparison of Palin versus President Obama. Sarah Palin's speech was a self serving pity fest on how her feelings were hurt. She cannot walk back her repugnant rhetoric on the "Blood Libel" comment. She speaks about being against hate and violence and then uses an example of hate and violence. President Obama on the other hand offers us hope and a path to mutual cooperation.

I saw an article that used these two speeches to compare the divide that current exists in this country. On one side we have those who are all about me/I, the other camp is on the side of us/we. Pick a side, it is your choice. You can either be for us/we and move forward or be with the I/me and fall behind and you will be left behind. The people are looking for hope and people to govern. They are feed up with politics as usual and the hate and violence that surrounds it.

I too believe....never lost faith with the President and my support for him continues...

Can we start donating for the 2012 campaign already?

The speech was what the nation needed to spare us from uncompromising bullets of sarah "it must be me" palin. One of the reasons why I VOTED for him....

I have only One question to ask & it's directed at our MSM "Did President Obama Pass the latest test that you gave Him"?

No Joe, JoannaSmith, Joe/Albany, where are you at... I'm waiting for your kind words about the president. Thank you when you do leave that nice message (in advance).

The Presidents speech last night was one of the finest and most moving I've ever heard or read, and I can assure you I've heard and read many in my many years.

This was a "Gettysburg Address" type speech.

As for Mr.Boehner, he'd rather be doing cocktails with his "BUDS". Shameful.

As for Mr.Boehner, he'd rather be doing cocktails with his "BUDS". Shameful.

Did you know that John and numerous other Republicans were personally invited by President Obama to accompany him on Air Force One to attend the memorial service?

In return he got - Thanks but NO thanks! Cocktails & Cash are more pressing issues!

Tom, Speaker Boehner goes to a GOP fundraiser instead of the memorial services.

We have always known where his priorities are. Always. He didn't disappoint, although I thought his decision this time was extremely callous, being a leader and all. Guess he doesn't understand what a leadership role is quite yet.

There is no question that it was a good speech, and the decision to use notecards was the right one. Before you leap, let me say that I have never attended a funeral or memorial service where the eulogist did NOT use notes- it is too hard to keep ones thoughts together under such emotionally taxing circumstances.

Last night was NOT the right time to address the problem once again revealed by this tragedy- but today IS the right time. We must move forward and address our unrealistic laws protecting the "rights" of the mentally disturbed to avoid evaluation and treatment.

I am not a psychiatrist, nor am I a civil rights attorney. However, in the last few days I have done some research on this issue, and discovered that:

It was JFK who signed legislation that led to deinstitutionalization. There were some very good reasons for this. Up until that time, those with developmental disabilities were treated in the same way as those who had mental diseases and defects. They were removed from their families and institutionalized, because no one understood their potential to learn and progress. I assume that having a sister with developmental disabilities gave Kennedy better insight into the issue.

Unfortunately, as a result of equating two different issues, chasms, rather than cracks, were opened in the system. In a signing statement, Kennedy said that these patients would be removed from state institutions, and cared for in "loving" community centers.

None existed.

During the 1970's civil libertarians began a fifty state strategy of lawsuits to force the closing of state institutions. Armed with federal court orders, they were successful in forcing the wholesale release of patients on unprepared communities. The worse victims of these lawsuits were the patients themselves. They have the right to refuse medications that would enable them to live more normal lives- and many do. They have the right to refuse involuntary commitment absent an overt act of violence- and many do. That most are reduced to living on the streets, and a small minority commit acts of violence are the unforeseen consequence of these rights.

http://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=593&Itemid=193

We must enact more realistic laws governing those who cannot care for themselves. This is neither a rightmor left issue, but an issue for all Americans

Good post no joe . . . this is an issue that definitely needs more attention.

President Obama gave a great speech/address. That is what he does best and he was brilliant, especially in a weird environment where there was cheering at a memorial service. I originally hoped he would not bring politics/the civility issue up, but it didn't feel like a memorial, he did bring it up and closed brilliantly - rain puddles in Heaven - wow.

Louis, US Navy, etc. as I just said, one of the points addressed was the issue of civility, he in effect rebuked so much of what has been said by the left here at FR and nationwide - that this was not caused by a lack of civility. He called for America to be united.

Yet 1st post, 2nd post bashing Palin - still haven't got the message?

Tunde taunt? I appreciate the good natured jab, better and nicer than the Feisty/Bev/Ron stuff. My only negative comment would be that I wish he would have addressed the jumping to conclusions/blaming the right rhetoric before yesterday. He managed to do it before for lesser events such as failed terrorist acts and even after a bigger event where the murderer shouts Allahu Akbar as he shot and killed 13 at Ft. Hood. Probably just me, but no big deal - the public wasn't buying it anyway.

I didn't bash Palin, I pointed out the attempts to compare her to President Obama. There are plenty of people I wouldn't hire to clean up behind my dog... I don't keep her in the news, she does a good job of doing that herself. I just wish her vitriolic attacks would go away, which means I wish she would just go away... can we agree on that Bob? Can we agree that the kind of speeches she makes has no place in the public forum of American politics? I hope so.

The President actually captured the mood of the electorate. Last November, the message was not, "We trust Republicans." It was not, "We hate Democrats." It was a basic primal scream, "Help us get out of this mess!"

The President has clearly told us what we all SHOULD know in our hearts. Violence, hatred, an "us against them mentality", these destructive forces are guaranteed to keep us mired in this mess, guaranteed to assure gridlock. Those forces do not create success.

Did Boehner make a mistake? You bet. He clearly demonstrates his priorities. He will not be crying over missed cocktails. In that regard, he has helped those of us trying desperately to re-capture the heart and soul of an America, once the envy of the world. If we had any questions about the priorities of the G.O.P., Mr. Boehner has given us a clear answer.

Did Sarah Palin make a mistake? You bet. While she wallows in her sociopathic self-pity and demonstrates her woeful ignorance of history, a more moderate Mitt Romney and his counterparts thank her. Sarah Palin committed political suicide on national television. This too, is a benefit for those who seek accommodation and compromise rather than acidic rhetoric.

Please, all posters here, let's take this opportunity to understand that a winning position need not be defined by a losing position. We really can ALL win. We do not have to have losers.

Yes, I too find myself frustrated when we make no progress, when we fight any and all solutions. However, the words of the President remain true and it is imperative, indeed it is crucial to the survival of our nation, that we understand them. This is not about Republicans or Democrats, this is not about the left or the right, this is not about conservatives or liberals. This is about every single citizen of the United States; all of us, every last one of us.

For Christina Taylor Green & Her Family:

I am standing on the sea shore,
A ship sails in the morning breeze and starts for the ocean.
She is an object of beauty and I stand watching her
Till at last she fades on the horizon and someone at my side says:
"She is gone."

Gone! Where?
Gone from my sight - that is all.
She is just as large in the masts, hull and spars as she was when I saw her
And just as able to bear her load of living freight to its destination.
The diminished size and total loss of sight is in me,
not in her.

And just at the moment when someone at my side says,
"She is gone",
There are others who are watching her coming, and other voices take up a glad shout:
"There she comes"
- and that is dying. An horizon and just the limit of our sight.
Lift us up, Oh Lord, that we may see further.

Cross hairs on a map means shoot the blue dog Congresswoman, but I wouldn't hire her to clean up my dogs crap is not a shot? OK

And in all fairness, US Navy did the disproportionate share of bashing.

The left has bashed and bashed and bashed, Sarah Palin. Without the left and media, there would not be the attention. You and the left want her to go away, quit obsessing about her.

Apologies on post #1.14 - I neglected to include the author: David Harkins.

Bob, just chill out especially with your first comment... if you meant to say something else, then fine, but your tripping on your own tongue. End of discussion.

1.15 another vote against coming together as a nation in time of tragedy.

Joe - 755363

Precisely where is the value in your comment?

Campaign rhetoric, tee shirts, cheering crowds, all at a funeral service

The Campaigner-in-Chief doing the ONLY thing he knows how

While his leftist supporters, dumbfounded by historic conservative wins in November, snarl and attack without reason like curs stung on the muzzle for betraying their masters

no jo: That was a much better conceptualisation of the problem of the mentally ill, and on most of it I can agree with you. Here is where we differ: The problem is more the inability of the mentally ill to get help through insurance, most plans having limits. The other problem is that Community Service programs have been gutted. The thing we know for sure about the mentally ill is the more isolated they become the worse the outcomes. The more involved, through job training, mental health social clubs, transportation and individual living site support, the better the outcomes. There is no question that better assessment as to who actually should access services should be implemented. But, for that to happen, family education (you can't KNOW how complex this morass is) which would require good case management service is where we must begin. Now, your post was very reasonable, and I am asking this question in the same vein. How do we fund it?

Louis,

The first sentence was just my inarticulate puzzlement of the liberal incongruity. No biggie.

“There's not a liberal America and a conservative America; there's the United States of America” said Obama in 2006.

The funeral sounded like a repeat of that campaign but did he really mean it? One has to wonder when he's been so negative and nasty with his opponents since coming into office. In all my long years, I've never heard such a negative, double sided president as Obama. I've become skeptical every time he opens his mouth.

One can only hope that he's turned the corner and genuinely realizes that divisive politics doesn't play well with this country.

Certainly didn't take long for the effects of the President's speech to wear off, did it. Attacking Palin is not what he had in mind, now is it?

Madison:

I missed the value of your comment. Help me out.

Bob:

What is a liberal incongruity?

Newday, how about by cutting redundant or non-productive programs?

I will give you an example: my last governor, Corzine, implemented mandatory pre- school for all children. His reasoning was that middle class students do better than poorer students, and almost all of them go to preschool. Not bad reasoning, I admit.

We have, in this state, what are called "Abbot" districts, named for a lawsuit that said that there were funding discrepancies between the suburbs and the cities. (it is too long and complicated to summarize, but, suffice to say, at first, the goal was to equalize spending per student, and now, the Abbots get three times the funding of the suburban districts- and test scores continue to spiral downward).

Therefore, all state taxpayers were required to provide pre-schools for the Abbot districts. The results came in this past week-

Those kids are actually doing WORSE.

There is a lot of handwringing. There is a lot of stunned surprise. There is a lot of "how could this happen".

There is no statement that "this failed. Let's cancel it".

We have a lot of programs like that. Work programs that benefit the relatives of politicians. School buildings only a few years old being re-built with state funds, that include Olympic swimming pools, because some state politician has a brother in law who happens to be a contractor, and a cousin who installs indoor pools.

I can pretty much guarantee that, if you look within your state budget, you will find similar atrocities. So, begin by cutting those wasteful programs, and then, if necessary, raise whatever revenue is necessary to fully fund it.

First, though, the laws must be addressed. None of this is any good when those who are not rational or competent to make such decisions are forced by law to make them. We need a realistic view of the issue.

No Joe & New Day---you are both raising good points about the mental health issues that the tragedy in Az. demonstrates. It seems to me that as a society we have to fund the treatments through our government---both from a sense of compassion for the suffering of the ill and their families as well as to protect us all when that suffering leads to violent acts.

That was a lovely post Feisty. I will be borrowing that for future reference. That was a wonderful way to look at one's passing and remembrance.

President Obama rebuked both the left AND THE RIGHT. Do not hop on the finger pointing wagon. Both sides have their own issues and should be called out.

Louis, US Navy, etc. as I just said, one of the points addressed was the issue of civility, he in effect rebuked so much of what has been said by the left here at FR and nationwide - that this was not caused by a lack of civility. He called for America to be united.

To try and say he was addressing only us libs/progressives is wrong. I called Palin out for what she has said and done. Show me one Democratic Governor that was also the VP Candidate that said things like "lock and load", "if balletsdon't work, use bullets", don't retreat, reload". All these statements and the cross hairs have a violent theme in them. Her speech contain a inflammatory reference to "Blood Libel" which was about the persecution of the Jews and was used by Nazi Germany in their persecution of the Jews and the deaths of millions in concentration camps. To claim she is against hate speech and violence and then use this reference was very poor judgement. Definitely not of the caliber of someone who may want to be President. I stand by my posts.

You cannot beleive what you are saying here. "Never heard such a negative, double sided president as Obama". What are you two years old. He is probably one of the really nice guys out there.

You can disagree with his policies but to call him devisive is just not true. Did you know that in poll after poll most americans like the President as a person even when they disagree with him. In this mans heart he wants the best for this country and hopefully we all can find that thing that will stop both sides that, villainies our Presidents. I certainly did not support President Bush, but, I think he was a very good man too. I would think that even President Obama had to appreciate President Bush, in that he is the guy who put qualified african americans in some of the top positions in this country, that had never been done before.

I am not sure using redundant programs to fund treatment/case management for the mentally ill would quite cover the amount needed. I haven't studied it however. I think Steeler Fan makes more the point, it must come as a commitment from the Federal Govt. down. That is how the funding got cut to begin with. I don't know if you are aware that each state has different laws regarding involuntary commitment, but I shudder to think that we go back to the really old days when it was relatively easy to remove someone from society by making claims that they are crazy. The other point is this: If you demand forced treatment, how do you implement that? Do you hold someone down a couple of times of day and give meds? I can't see any medical professional wanting to be involved in that. Do we need to have this discussion yes. But it goes back to what it always does...money.

What an outstanding speech the President gave last night! It struck just the right tone, not political but subtly addressing the politics that divide us. What I really remember though is the challenge to become the people we can be and the challenge to show future generations what we should be.

To those who question cheering at a memorial: Who says funerals or memorials should be dreary? Sad perhaps but we should remember the good in people's lives and celebrate that. And there were living people to celebrate as well. I have been to a few memorial services lately where the mood is more upbeat than somber. I like it.

Yesterday was an interesting lesson. We have a much clearer picture of where the President stands. And where the country stands. And where Mr. Boehner stands. And where Ms.Palin stands.

NJ NB:

Research the therapies that were used in the 50's and 60's and how someone could be locked up in a mental institute for life will no real treatment. It was proved that you could take a sane person and place them in an institute and after a short period of time, they would exhibit psychotic behavior. That is why the mental health industry of the time failed. Kennedy knew something about the mental health facilities, since his sister was locked away because of mental impairment. Even the mentally ill have rights. Most are not as phychotic as this guy from Arizona.

LouisJ...practice what you preach.

Great discussion of the mental health issue. NJ, thanks for bringing that up, and you make some good points on that topic.

To the vast majority of the posters, I thank you for your posts regarding civility and the issue of mental illness that has not been adequately addressed for decades. Both are issues we, as Americans need to confront and deal with to become what Pres Reagan called "the shining city atop the hill". While not a fan of his, I admire the fact that he and Tip O'Neill could disagree on most everything, yet never be disagreeable to one another; in fact both considered the other a friend. We need, as a nation to go back to that way of thinking.

As for those who chose to post partisan posts on this, the day poor little Christina is being laid to rest, all I will say is shame on you. You have chosen to be negative when this country needs to be positive. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions, but could you not, at the very least, refrain from being negative until after all those who were slain have been buried, and their families have mourned? If you want to discuss breeching the gap that has caused the lack of civility in our Nations's political and social discourse, then please bring something positive to the table.

This country has always had those willing to go out of their way to portray their opponents as demons. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson had just such a relationship, yet no matter how much they disliked each other and each other's ideas, they still acted like gentlemen, for they were Statesmen first, politicians last. In most every Presidential election since then ,there were those willing to spread lies and innuendo about one or the other candidates. Heck, remember the Bush/Rove whisper campaign in SC about McCain having black children out of wedlock, when in fact he and his wife had adopted two beautiful orphans from Laos? That was 100% GOP on GOP hate. We, as a nation, as a family of Americans all, must say enough is enough! Hate, violent imagery whether in words, pictures, or deeds (like Rep Giffords' opponent having a fundraiser at a gun club entitled "shoot a fully automatic M16 with the Candidate") have no place in our national debates. If we must disagree, and we will as it is human nature, let us do so in a manner that is respectful of one another. You express your ideas, I express mine, and then let us work to a middle ground where we both can agree. Will either of us be happy with the end result? No, but we can live with it, and in time come to see how we can improve it, regardless of which "side" that improvement favors. Making the US a more perfect union is worth sacrificing our right to be uncivil toward each other in favor of being civil.

This is the first day of the rest of the US' life, let us make the most of it in the best way possible. Let us resolve that from this point forward, we will think of each other as part of the same American Family, and while we disagree, we will do so in a way that is productive, and positive. No more demonizing those we disagree with, but rather look for the common ground and work toward it. Let us require of our leaders that they act in accordance with the statesman-like nature their offices are meant to imply. From the lowest ranking local official to the President of the US of A, may their better natures rule them, and in so doing live up to what our Founding Fathers believed was the way to govern - with honor, respect and humility.

A Memorial service was turned into a political rally, Obama interrupted over 50 times for applause, SICK!

Joe-755363,

Even though your comment was collapsed by the community I read it anyway. In order to create jobs in our country we have to develop more trust. To expect the President to create jobs in a speech that didn't have a thing to do with jobs is short sited. I am not going to criticize you but point out that is people with your attitude that is hurting our country, job creation and civility.

It can't be about us against them as some news organizations and politicians are trying to establish. It has to be one Country United together with different opinions but respect for others opinions as well as peaceful discord. Both sides of the fence need to tear it down, we really don't need a Berlin Wall in the United States and we can ill afford a civil war as some have suggested.

In order for our country to truely be a great nation we need people who are striving to be good people and are willing to listen to the opposing side of view and take the time to see if it could be a better solution than the one we are thinking about.

Divided we fail, united we heal and get back on track. I will end this post by praying that we can all go out of our way to be peaceful, respectful and open to people who are or think differently than we do.

My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.

Obama is a great speaker and he hit the right notes last night.

Being a great speaker does not make a great president. Lincoln was supposedly a terrible public speaker. The media that hated George Bush because he was not always articulate and now loves Obama because he gives a good speech.

I think Obama is smart and energetic. I like him and his family. I don't wish ill upon him. I don't think he is trying to ruin the country. He simply has no business or economic experience and it shows. The Kensian economic theories they have tried were disproven 50 years ago.

So before we canonize Obama because he gave a good speech, we have to objectively look at what he has accomplished for the country and it ain't much. Passing destructive legislation is not an accomplishment.

I was truly saddened Saturday watching the events unfold. The shooter is a proven nutcase. I have a huge issue with the left using this tragedy to limit freedom of speech in the public square.

@ NoJoe ~ I'm absolutely with you, always have been, and always will be, unconditionally. Now, will you agree that more needs to be done to decrease the chances of weapons getting into the hands of the mentally ill, the hands of innocent children, or anyone's hands, really, who harbors ILL-WILL?

US Navy guy - the reason her speech was different is because she is being wrongly "accused" of causing this tradegy by sick minded liberals...

Did any of you notice this so called "memorial" did not have any reverends or priest there from what I can tell. (I could not watch the entire thing so correct me if I am wrong)

This was nothing more than a disgusting "pep rally"...It just did not have the feel of a memorial for me..

@Gary - you are 100 percent correct...

MarkWS:

Why does a memorial require the presence of ".....any reverends or priest"?

The funeral sounded like a repeat of that campaign but did he really mean it? One has to wonder when he's been so negative and nasty with his opponents since coming into office. In all my long years, I've never heard such a negative, double sided president as Obama. I've become skeptical every time he opens his mouth.

One can only hope that he's turned the corner and genuinely realizes that divisive politics doesn't play well with this country.

I read stuff like this and I just don't know what to say. First Read has it right: There's a bubble world out there in which everything is threat and retaliation.

No Joe:

I will be looking for more posts like your incisive one regarding Corzine's mandatory pre-school. It sounds as though this is one of those "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" programs.

You are so correct that programs must be re-evaluated constantly, not only for whether they actually achieve their desired goals, but for whether they meet - or don't meet - those goals efficiently.

I leave you with this thought, not just regarding mandatory pre-school, but mandatory education of any kind. Compulsory school attendance DOES NOT equate with education. In fact, such a model equates far more closely with incarceration. That's hardly the environment that encourages learning.

If you get a moment or two, I urge you to take a look at some of the articles of John Taylor Gatto. Our current education model is a disaster and needs to be not just reformed, but completely taken apart, and built from the ground up.

If ever there was fertile ground for cooperation between left and right, Dem and Repub, this is it.

Annamolly, I have never DISAGREED with keeping guns out of the hands of those who should not have them.

When my son was a little boy, when arranging playmates, I ALWAYS asked if there was a gun in the house- if there was, they played at MY house. My son was much more like Curious George than Little Lord Fauntleroy, if you get my drift, and I would not trust a locked cabinet or an armed guard to keep his curiosity in check.

I say this as a daughter, sister, niece, and cousin of law enforcement officers.

The question is: how. Doing something for the sake of doing something may well fail. I would like to get behind sensible, workable solutions.

In fact, I think we all would.

no joe, no bo, nj

..........................but today IS the right time. We must move forward and address our unrealistic laws protecting the "rights" of the mentally disturbed to avoid evaluation and treatment.

I agree with you post entirely.

When the laws were enacted, essentially opening the floodgates of mentally ill people I was working in a Pub two blocks from the Albany Medical Center that had a wing devoted to the mentally ill. Many of the recently released found there way to the Pub and usually had to be removed, sometimes physically. Most were terribly unaware of their surroundings. People wandering the streets in nothing but a hospital gown were commonplace.

The issue at the time was that the institutions were no more than warehouses where inmates (patients) often slept on the floor in their own filth and were treated worst than dogs. Also they were so heavily medicated that any hope of treatment was eliminated.

Still,releasing them in the way the did was unconscionable. These people were clearly a danger to themselves and others. The had no hope of obtaining any kind of work as they were too far removed from reality.

But the other side of the issue is that there were those who were declared mentally ill who were actually perfectly sane. Teenagers who acted out could easily be committed. If you were gay that was sufficient reason to be detained and given shock treatments. The process was often unfair.

Yet in a country as wealthy as America we have disturbed people sleeping on the streets and in this case shooting a state Representative. It is not the first time and certainly not the last.

We can do better.

I thought it strange that there was so much cheering & clapping at this event that was part memorial, part articulation to the nation that civility is better than hostility.
On mental health in our society: Mental health is so broad an issue, touching many levels-- Wholesome communities in which people are interpersonally connected for mutual support, especially parent raising children and children growing up. Bullying & uncivil discourse, including uncivil TV/web/PC "entertainment". Dysfunctional schools with many students not learning basics, and many capable students not challenged to develop their skills and aspirations (little homework, go home & play video games); moreover, teachers are insufficiently esteemed by society, insufficiently paid (warpedly, people who design addicting or violent video games make more [I won't say "earn more"], than teachers [& social workers]) and insufficiently respected, and --partly as a consequence of the preceding-- some (even a few is too many) are themselves insufficiently educated. Mental health support should occur from pre-pregnancy to nursing home. Though we've been trying for decades, the support channels (support groups, counselors & social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, neuroscientists) are still learning better methods and theories of behaviours. And people (adults, parents, children) may be slow to avail themselves of the variety of resources out there because of negative stigmata (whether social or from an employer) or because health insurance plans do not always cover such resources.
Still, even though it appears that the shooter in Arizona was mainly consumed by mental illness, I think that this sad event affords our society an opportunity to step back and reconsider the potential negative effects of inflammatory or uncivil or intolerant dispositions & language. It's not easy to communicate & dialogue with those whose ideas differ from ours, even when their general philosophies are close to ours; it takes greater dedication still to patiently work through ideas with those whose philosophies are not close to ours. Isn't it worth such effort & time, even if that leaves us with less time for TV or video/pc games?

Well David...most memorials I have been to, there is either a preist, preacher etc...you would think that at this big "memorial" there would someone like such there..

This was nothing more than a "pep" rally in my opinion...you would think the nation, and the people of AZ would find some peace and comfort from someone of the "faith" speaking...vs a punch of beauracrats speaking of "god" etc...

"hostage takers" "Negotiating with hostage takers" "They bring a knife and we will bring a gun"...ring any bells..

Well then Mark I guess since it's "didn't feel" like a memorial to YOU then it must not have been. Arrogant much? You THE authority on what memorials are to be like? Ever planned a memorial? Ever attended a memorial? As for priests and reverends, do you know the religios leaning of ALL the people killed? oh wait, you admit you didn't watch the whole thing. Guess it all came to you via osmosis huh? pathetic.

While you are taking this as your opportunity to hate on the POTUS because the memorial wasn't to your standards, let's have the hate for Jan Brewer, the Mayor of Tucson, the congress woman's husband and all the other political figures that spoke. Not to mention the people who were INVOLVED in this tragedy. Oh that's right. You didn't watch it.

Navy,

I would be interested in that article that you mentioned below. Reason why I ask is that is Blood Libel has nothing to do with Nazi Germany.

"Her speech contain a inflammatory reference to "Blood Libel" which was about the persecution of the Jews and was used by Nazi Germany in their persecution of the Jews and the deaths of millions in concentration camps."

This is the first time in my adult life that I have actually been proud of Obama.

Our President was elected because the majority felt that he embodied inspiration and peace. Yesterday, he took us back to that core space within us all that gave rise to the word "Hope."

Obama delivered his speech well last night. However, he is looking more each outing like another Washington DC, in the Beltway Politician. This is likely to be his down fall. One of things that hit me is the words that flowed did not match what a large percentage of the people believe they are witnessing on a daily basis. And that leaves Obama in the famous position of DO AS I SAY – NOT AS I DO.

US Navy,

I don't follow Palin, I don't hang on her every word. Why do you guys?

I don't know the context of the phrases. I don't care, she is irelevent to me. Why do you obsess about her?

"don't retreat, reload." I don't have any idea of the context. I do understand the concept of not retreating. To retreat means to withdraw from something, such as something difficult. What's the problem with that? I do understand the concept of reloading - to refill; to load again. It could mean to reload the dishwasher. Ridiculous - yea, she wasn't talking about dirty dishes. Reload a gun? Ridiculous - yea, she wasn't talking about shooting anyone, murder.

Let me ask you Navy, to reload implies that you need to load again, right? In the case of a firearm, you shot your bullets, and you refill the gun with what - bullets, the same thing, right? So if Sarah is "literally" suggesting bullets would that not "literally" mean bullets had already been used? Who was shooting real "literal" bullets before that needed to be replaced? This is absurd and asinine to have to drop to a 3 year old's level to try to explain it to you. And what's worse - you still won't get it.

I also understand the meaning of bigot - somebody with strong opinions, especially on politics, religion, or ethnicity, who refuses to accept different views.

So you have strong views that differ with Sarah. You take a simple phrase like reload and warp it into "violent" rhetoric to marginalize her, demonize her and her views....

I stand by my posts.

Spoken like a true "literal" bigot?

I don't think this is what Obama was talking about - probably just me, though.

Is it not the the wrong time and place to make any other comments except that,THANK YOU p,obama for your leader ship in this very tragic moment in the U S A history, the saddest part is this beautiful little girl that was taken form her mum and dad,my hart is with then , i can only think this, as JESUS, said ,suffer onto me little children for such is your is the kingdom of god, ,i feel she is in heaven with him and i feel that at the moment it happen she felt no pain he wipes away all tears i hope these word help in any way for which you have a mountains of pain to climb ,GOD. BLESS YOU

Shellie, as a matter of fact I have plan and attendend many memorials....I tried to watch this "pep" rally but after getting sick to my stomach I had to change the channel to Home and Garden TV...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html

Here is anticle that shows that most americans believe in god....and to not have someone there that represents the faith is a mistake in my opinion...but then again...I am not sure Mr. O believes in god...

No, I am not a birther, no I don't think Mr O is a muslem, but yes, I do think Mr O joined Rev Wrights church to gain access to politicans etc to grow his career in politics....

Don't you find it strange that when Mr O quotes the constitution he leaves out words such as "creator" etc...

Why did we need a national memorial type event, hosted by the President of the United States. Yes, a Federal Judge was murdered, with six other people, but does that really raise to the level that it requires Presidential intervention to please for soul searching or and appeals for national unity.

The memorial was hosted by the University of Arizona. The president was invited to speak, stunning many in the state who didn't believe he would actually take time out of his schedule to even attend such an event in southern Arizona, let alone to deliver a speech.

As for those who have complained about the cheering, you have to understand a few things. First, people began lining up the night before to get in, so it stands to reason that college students (those who would have already been on the U of A campus) would make up a reasonable chunk of those in attendance. Second, I can tell you from my own experience living in the area, Arizonans can be a bit... boisterous, let's say. Lastly, and possibly most importantly, the people of Arizona have needed something uplifting since the shooting. There is nothing necessarily wrong with celebrating people's lives after they are gone or with finding joy in the remarkable progress Congresswoman Giffords is making.

I've personally met Ms. Giffords on three separate occasions, the first at an event similar to the one at which the shooting occured. The woman is simultaneously kind and tough as nails and if there is anyone who can come out on top of this, it is her.

@ Bob ~ Sarah Palin marginalizes and demonizes herself. No one has to do it for her.

And frankly, it's just cowardice to claim you don't recognize the implicit metaphor in "don't retreat, just re-load." If you acknowledge it, of course, then you would have to disavow it. And you just don't want to. So you pretend it isn't there.

As for context, her whole manufactured persona as a tough frontierswoman wielding her hunting rifle and standing over her kill provides the necessary backdrop. Or haven't you seen the pictures? I hear she's even got a TV show.

What's worse, a "literal bigot" who accepts the evidence of his lying eyes, or he who deliberately refuses to see?

Anna,

so is it just cowardice to claim you don't recognize the implicit metaphor in "they bring a knife we bring a gun", "hostage takers" , " negotiating with hostage takers" etc.... just curious...

Well, things started out smoothly but it would appear this thread, like most very active threads on FR, is destined to devolve.

It's a shame... Go to page 3 or 4 and see who didn't get the 'We are Better' memo (if you dare)! :o(

***UPDATE*** Make that page 6 or 7 - they've worked themselves into a hate fueled frenzy!

Don Walters I respect what you have to say about having a congress that is for the people, and a government that spends responsible. But your statements about health care are just not true. I believe that you have been mislead (which is not the first time this has happened for one Obama's policies).

There is no such thing has government run healthcare, there is only health care reform. All the facts are spelled out on not some talk show or a journalists opinion of the bill. In fact, government run healthcare was something Obama gave up in an effort to have a bipartisan bill.

Second, Obama and Pelosi was listening to the people, when they said they wanted healthcare reform. According to the 2010 Mid Term Exit Polls (), 1 out of 2 Americans were for health care reform. You have to learn to compromise with the other half of people out there.

Third, Health care bill is not going to cost Trillions! of dollars, according to the COB (non partisan office) it will actually save $143 Billion over the 2010 - 2019 period ().

I'm just saying most peoples hate for Obama's policies comes from lack of their own personal research, we can no longer depend on the media as our only source of information.

@ No Joe ~ ANY solutions are needed right now, even if incremental. I saw a great post by Fielden last night making that point, which seems to get lost in the shuffle. The fact that we can't stop all deaths from drunken driving doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop some. So, too, with deaths by gunshot. ANY reduction would be welcome. Before you climb a mountain, you have to climb the foothills.

@ Mark ~ Evidently, you don't know me. The thing about the knife and a gun was wrong, too, and I'd say it to President Obama's face. The difference between him and Ms. Palin is that I'm sure he has reflected on it and come up with some thought other than blood libel. And I think we should always negotiate with hostage takers who will talk to us. I'm just not real big on hostage takers, if you know what -- and who -- I mean, and I'm sure you do. If you think I missed your point on that, it's because I did -- deliberately, to make my own point.

no joe and newday,

Thanks for discussion of the really important issue regarding the shootings - mental health.

No one knows for sure, but it appears that schizophrenia is indicated. According to statistics, there are another 1,600 to 2,100 Jeffery Laughners, (those demonstrating manifestations that have a propensity for violence) still out there - in Arizona alone.

The police came to the campus 5 times, classmates worried about him being a crazy shooter, his teacher feared turning his back on him, friends would not go into the desert with him, on and on and on. Laughner should have been discovered.

Schizophrenia starts manifesting typically in the late teens and early adulthood. Look at Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc. We have to discover these guys. The police, the teachers, especially those involved with this demographic should receive education on identifying potential problems, the social responsibility to take appropriate steps, what the appropriate steps are, etc.

Mental health / national health care, etc. is a big complex issue. But, protecting society from these specific cases could easily be addressed, a small but very important step could be taken to help prevent these tragadies. I hope it starts soon, instead of nebulous clip laws, political rhetoric resolutions, etc., - before one of the 1,600 Laughners in Arizona, or tens of thousands in the other states talk to a skull and goes off.

Are you high? What planet are you on? This wasn't a memorial. This was another Paul Welstone pep rally!

Your hero can call us- the GOP 'the enemy', but that's just fine!

Typical libs You make us all sick

(Sorry my references were not included)

Don Walters I respect what you have to say about having a congress that is for the people, and a government that spends responsible. But your statements about health care are just not true. I believe that you have been mislead (which is not the first time this has happened for one Obama's policies).

There is no such thing has government healthcare, there is only health care reform. All the facts are spelled out on the White House Health Care Website healthcare.gov (www.healthcare.gov), not some talk show or a journalists opinion of the bill. In fact, government run healthcare was something Obama gave up in an effort to have a bipartisan bill.

Second, Obama and Pelosi was listening to the people, when they said they wanted healthcare reform. According to the 2010 Mid Term Exit Polls (abcnews.go.com/politics/2010_elections/National?ep=house), 1 out of 2 Americans were for health care reform. You have to learn to compromise with the other half of people out there.

Third, Health care bill is not going to cost Trillions! of dollars, according to the CBO (non partisan office) it will actually save $143 Billion over the 2010 - 2019 period (www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/health.cfm).

I'm just saying most peoples hate for Obama's policies comes from lack of their own personal research, we can no longer depend on the media as our only source of information.

Wow, the comparisons between Palin and Obama are way off the charts. Kind of like comparing sweet and sour chicken to lemonade. I'm glad someone found Obama's speech inspirational. Enjoy it while it lasted.

First of all, Palin was responding to the Obama's political hacks in the media and other places (like the investigating sheriff). Sorry, but putting your hatchet men to work and then saying a few kind words hardly strikes me as inspirational. Especially in light of his rhetoric that he has spewed forth. In other words, this speech was something he didn't write hardly indicates a change of course. He merely did what he should do anyway. If only he had been doing all along what he should have been doing, then we'd all be a lot better off.

What he didn't say is that all of you people knocking Palin, KNOCK IT OFF! SHE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS!. Of course, he should have said that the moment it started. But, he didn't and he remains our thug-in-chief. Thank the Gods there are intelligent people like Palin around to stay up beat and see what is really going on in this country.

Reading more comments here, some good discussion between right and left on mental health issues and other questions--a respectful and civil discourse. I applaud the effort of both sides; let us continue and we can make a difference. Some comments reflect the usual "attack" because it is in those minds all anti-Pres Obama all the time.

A couple things, there was a civil and respectful comment about the President's use of notes last night. I would point out that at every memorial service he has attended and spoken, the President has used notes because there are times when the teleprompter is simply not appropriate and he knows that as well as we do.

The second was the question about why we needed a National Memorial Service--what narrow thinking. This was a national tragedy, an attack on OUR democracy. It could just as easily have happened at a republican congressional member's town hall or congress on your corner. Dislike of any president is never an excuse to declare a horrific incident as unworthy of a national memorial service.

Socialistbedamned:

This radical agenda you wrote about; if it's being constructed and implemented "behind closed doors" as you say, how do you know about it? Part of the inner circle of conspirators, are you?

I don't see anything in your post that you can substantiate. It's full of talking points and vicious rhetoric, but it is fact-free.

MarkWS:

The percentage of Americans who identify themselves as religious is irrelevant. Our Constitution specifically states in Article VI, paragraph 3: "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." The President was not speaking as a religious leader, nor should he EVER.

Further, no one walking this planet has ever laid eyes on a God or gods. Your vision of a "creator" is necessarily different from the vision of any other. Only you know what is in your mind. No one else.

Spoken like a true "literal" bigot?

Very Civil.

David Walker- I am familiar with Gatto's work. Oddly enough, a former colleague of mine recommended his writings to me.

I was bemoaning the very things he does- if you have ever watched a very young child master a new skill, you will see the joy on that child's face. Our schools seem designed to eliminate that joy, and replace it with artificial 'self-esteem', which even the children do not buy.

When I was teaching, my school district insisted on 'state reports' in my grade. If there were a worse way to teach research skills, I did not know of one. So, I got creative. I always gave my kids three states to work on, assigned them into groups, and worked within their talents and interests.

The kids into music wrote original songs that incorporated the history of the state. The kids, (they were always girls, I must add), into fashion designed fashions for different periods. If I had 'builders' , they designed buildings, if I had cooks, they made foods.

They learned a lot more that way, stuff they would retain, as well as an admiration for their classmates' talents- as well as their own.

Incidentally, it was exhausting to teach that way, which is why I resigned when I decided to back to school.

It is also why most teachers do not teach that way. Would that more would.

We've all seen a child throw a tantrum. It starts over something minor and then blossums into something that's lost all meaning. The child cannot even remember what started it...but the tantrum has a "life all of its own"...and it goes on and on...until the wise parent calls for a "time out". The discourse between the Left and Right, Democrats and Republicans, has become a tantrum....and the President has called for a "time out".

Mark 1.64

Ironic. Your complaint is that when discussing the Constitution President Obama leaves out the "Creator." The "Creator" is not referred to within the US Consitution. He cannot omit what is not there for the devious purpose to which you infer. I urge you to review the full text. I believe you are confusing the Constitution with the Bill of Rights.

Paul-Florida

Don’t really have an axe to grind here since the question was addressed to my friend Navy but I’ll throw in my two cents anyway.

It just kind of reinforces the President’s point to me which was some of us need to step back a little and make sure that we’ve put our minds in gear and checked out the brakes on the rig before we put that old Mouth in motion. Don’t think to much of Ms. Palin but she would seem to me to be a prime Candidate

1930's +: Hitler re-used the blood-libel myth as justification for the Holocaust. The Nazi periodical, Der Stürmer, often published special issues devoted to allegations of ritual murder by Jews. Hitler had asked that a propaganda film be made of the 1840 Damascus case. World War II ended before it could be made.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm

I am in no way a supporter of any of Obama's policies, yet I do believe the tone of the speech was perfect. I was very unimpressed with the crowd's response to him and the other speakers, I felt their tone was direspectful and just plain bizzaar.

This MSNBC article is ridiculous and misses completely the message of last night's speech. The only political moment in the president's speech was a frontal slap of this network (Oberman and co.) and their ilk. Palin and all those who pointed out the wacko left's knee-jerk right wing blaming were right on to do so. I, for one, am glad they did not cower in the corner as usual, but called them out.

Excellent speech, moving and powerful. Probably the best Presidential speech I have ever heard.

A lot of people said that those on the far right, who hate Obama, will find a problem with whatever he says. This is true, as exemplified today. Those on the far right will never be satisfied . . . Jesus Christ himself could have appeared at the service and those on the far right would still have a problem with it. They will never agree with the President, no matter what happens. Luckily for us, they are in the minority, and the majority of people found inspiration last night.

As far as Palin is concerned, she is no longer a factor. I sometimes wonder if she is trying to sabotage her own career. She made the decision to cancel her reality show, turning down millions, for an unknown reason . . . the only logical explanation is that she is going to make a run for the Presidency and can not have a reality show when she makes the announcement. Then she releases a video that kills any chance she had at winning. Did she really think an anti-semitic comment would go over well? This is not a well known saying that everyone uses . . . this is a saying that directly relates to Christians killing and torturing Jews. It would have been better to simply say "false accusations" or call it a "witch hunt" (if she wanted to be slightly controversial). Wasn't there anyone in her camp that raised their hand to say, "Maybe not the best choice of words"? Sure, she can try to spin it all she wants, but the damage is done. She will maintain her die-hard supporters, but they will not be enough to win the election.

And where was McCain, who is a the Senator for AZ??? He was definitely not at the memorial event for the Congresswoman and others killed from his own State. Was he attending the RNC party in D.C. that Boehner (Leader of the House, which includes Gabby as a member of) was attending as well? I'd say they were both "Tone Deaf" as to what went on in AZ. Does partying it up rank higher on their list than a tragic event involving the deaths and injuries of many people, esp. when McCain represents the State of AZ as a Senator?

Cali,

Your passionate irrational hate is clouding your judgement. "Anti-Semetic comment" that kind of absurd language is exactly what the president rebuked last night. You on the left would be well served to reflect on your irrational hatred of those who disagree with you. The difference between those of us on the right and those of you on the left is that we simply believe that you are wrong and will debate our points. Many (not all) on the left, not only believe that we on the right are wrong, but somehow equate that to being bad or evil. it is very difficult to have a civil debate with that type of misguided attitude.

For the last two years plus, Mr. Obama has divided and apologized for America at every turn. He has referred to political opponents (and fellow Americans) as "enemies", "hostage-takers", and during his campaign, told his supporters to "bring a gun" to a fight if "they bring a knife." This is who Obama is and always will be: a political idealogue and community agitator whom President Clinton was correct in describing as a thug. However, with the 2012 elections coming up and after the beating (oops, can I still say that?) his party took in November, time to do whatever it takes to get reelected.

Hence, the speech last night. Yes, we saw the New Obama: the triangulator who will put himself above the partisan fray and unite us all. Mr. Obama has had many opportunities to do just that over these last two years, but with Democrat supermajorities in Congress, I guess he just didn't feel the need.

I voted for this President, but have been speaking out against his policies since shortly after he took office. I thought his speech was excellent, albeit he should have spoken up Sunday when the liberal lynch mobs were in full gear. I agree that he looked very Presidential, something that has been misssing for sometime. I also hope he looks within himself regarding making statements regarding those he disagrees with. When he spoke last year at a Pro-immigration rally, he said, "We must reward our friends and punish our enemies". Regarding immigration, the enemies he spoke of are U.S. Citizens.

McCain was there sitting behind President Obama staring at the back of his head with that perplexed look of still trying to figure out how he beat him, "OMG! How did he do it? HOW DID HE DO IT?!!".

SMH

Sorry but two years is a long time to ponder one question.

Tod -

That's not hate at all, it's a fact. "Blood libel" is defined as an anti-semitic comment because it directly relates to an actual event in history wherein Jews were accused of killing children and using their blood for religious purposes. If she used a generic term, like "false accusation", then there would be no problem. But the phrase she used directly relates to a specific act in history. Look it up . . . you will not find "blood libel" defined as a generic phrase, used by everyone, to define false accusation. It is specifically assigned to anti-semitic actions in history.

How can a fact be hateful? Furthermore, how can it be hateful when I simply stated that she sabotaged herself?

If you would like to debate points, I am all for that. In fact I have tried to debate points on more than one occasion, and those on the right refuse. For instance, I have talked about health care including good points, as well as bad. Instead of debating the bad points, you on the right just call me a socialist and refuse to debate. I have pointed out that there are multiple different forms of socialism, and presented the actual definition of Marxism-Leninism . . . you on the right always change the subject. I have even agreed with half of the points made be Republicans, because I am a moderate . . . but I am called "liberal scum" because I do not agree with EVERY point. I have taken the concept of "personal responsibility" and "smaller government" further than the Tea Party (eliminating the FCC and requiring parents to be personally responsible for what their kids watch) . . . I am called liberal for wanting too much personal responsibility.

So tell me, Tod, how am I not trying to debate actual points when every point I make is met with insult instead of actual debate?

And where was McCain, who is a the Senator for AZ??? He was definitely not at the memorial event for the Congresswoman and others killed from his own State.

He was, actually. I believe he was seated behind the president, if I remember correctly, so you may have simply missed him.

Markws There is no mention of the creator, Jesus, the 10 comandments, God or any type of supernatural being in the Constatution or the Bill of rights,

Calypso I think you were meaning to say that creator is in the Declaration of Independance.

Mark the Declaration of Independance is not the ruling document that governs the United states. I love how the Religious right tries to portray that our country was founded on Chritianity, it was not. OUr country is secular and a republic.

Just for an FYI the Treaty of Triplo

Cali,

I don't know you or your politics nor do I care. Your post showed me that you are irrational. I spoke to YOU specifically about your bizzaar label and take on Sarah Palin's comments, and I still do. Stating that something is fact does not make it so. If you believe that Palin consciously referenced "blood libel" out of some sort of anti-semetic mindset then you are deluded. If not, then what's the connection, and why even bring her up?

My comments about liberals were generic and generally speaking true. I do wish the "many" I spoke of would reflect on them. I also wish knee-jerk consevatives would do the same.

Continued from previous my comment

Just for an FYI the Treaty of Tripoli

n 1797, the United States Senate ratified a treaty with Tripoli that stated in Article 11:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Also where does it say that you have to be religious to be president?

LouisJ, You use your imagination to put words in the mouth of John McCain. You say he sat there thinking "How did he do that? How could he have beaten me?" Using that terrific imagination of yours, do you think our President sat there after seeing the results of the November elections saying "How did we do that? How did we lose the support of the people?" Just curious.

Pirate man,

You really should do some reading of your own. You may rightly believe that we are now a secular nation, but any intelegent and well read (founding fathers) person would not make such a ridiculous statement concerning our history or the people who founded this great nation.

No is surprised that these left-wing pundits are jumping at the opportunity to try and salvage the Obama slide but it's in vain. People are on to this charlatan, snake-oil-salesman, socialist and his underhanded, behind closed doors, slight of hand to expand his radical agenda.

It's the vile progressives that have politicized the massacre. They are as mentally disturbed as the attack

This guy couldn't even wait one day. It's really sad.

I'm not "vile." I'm a family man and provider, a young widow and cancer survivor. My wife stayed home while I worked because it was the best thing for the kids I'd die for without giving it a second thought. I go to the same movies on weekends as anyone else and try my best to maintain my house and yard.

Moreover, I haven't politicized the massacre; in fact, no one has. There was an attempt to engage in a debate about the connection between inflammatory rhetoric, polarized politics, and violence that unfortunately devolved into finger pointing. Regrettably, I can't say that I'm innocent of that.

A good startover would be to stop referring to people as something they aren't. I am not a socialist, and a actual socialists must be amused by the idea that Barack Obama is. Socialism advocates state ownership and operation of critical means of production (or services). The closest any liberal has come to that is to advocate VA-style single-payer heath care; however, even the seven European countries that have this do not have socialized economies: They've made the pragmatic, not ideological, call that the free market cannot deliver health care of sufficient quality and efficiency. I happen to disagree with that, but just because I do doesn't mean that I think Finland is a socialist country. How could the home of Nokia possibly be socialisti

In short, how about some accuracy of language and minimal use of pejoratives? Neither precludes a passionate debate about things we care about.

right? while watching, i was trying to scan the crowd -- i didn't see him as well

Wow, alot of BRAINWASHED SHEEP leaving comments today!!!! I just love how the "community" is collapsing most posts that speak truth about Obummer and his B.S.!!! So I don't expect mine to last very long!!! LMFAO!!! YOUR PRES. OBUMMER IS A LYING AMERICA BASHING P.O.S.!!!!

To Tod-2791955:

I read the comment from Thought's from Cali and in no way found it to be filled with hatred, which you have manipulated it to be otherwise. Instead I found the comment brought up some excellent and civil questions (such as: Where was Palin's support team to guide her away from a poorly chosen phrase linked to a specific religion? Which was by the way the same religion of Gabby's.). Cali presented some other very rationally good thoughts as well, which you bashed as not being civil and full of hatred. The first thing that comes to mind with your response is: "Tunnel Vision". And, all I can say for such manipulation with that type of thinking without a debate or directing questions back to Cali is: "There are none so blind as those who won't see."

Tod wrote:

. You may rightly believe that we are now a secular nation, but any intelegent and well read (founding fathers) person would not make such a ridiculous statement concerning our history or the people who founded this great nation.

Tod, we're a secular nation by design, in that there is no official state religion and no state compulsion to attend church or adhere to a particular belief system. The Freedom of Religion clause in the First Amendment was inspired by Jefferson's Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom (Jefferson was a deist) and at the behest of small Christian sects who feared persecution by the state were there an official religion.

The fact that we're secular -- and I doubt that that's in dispute by even conservative legal scholars -- does not preclude citizens from practicing religion and in fact promotes it by eliminating any possibility of persecution. The upshot is that the United States is on of the most religious nations in the wealthy world.

In fact, our diversity of religious and non-religious beliefs strengthens the role of religion here: Catholicism has virtually collapsed in Western Europe because of the ongoing molestation scandal, leaving many countries without a religious base. Some will argue that that is just fine, but the point here is that the religious diversity enabled by secularism prevents such a thing from happening in the United States.

Put it another way: You wouldn't make it illegal to be an atheist, would you? Or limit the rights of atheists? Because if you would, what would keep atheists from turning the tables if they were in charge?

Obama was in his element, and did what he does best, give a speech. He did it well, but I still can’t get over the energy in the room. I’ve been to many memorials and have never been given a T-shirt, nor heard hoops and holler, as well as boos. It had an odd feeling of a pep rally. Was that Obama's fault? No. I just find it very odd and disturbing. I do not feel this “born again” energy will last. Obama's number are up, but that won’t last. A no-brainer speech, given by a great speaker, will only last until the next policy/political choices are made by this Administration. Mark my words. Add that to the discontent America is having with the liberals jumping to point fingers and use a tragedy for political gain. Especially unjustified, unsubstantiated, and downright horrid accusations for nothing more than a political move. The bodies were not even cold when the liberals started trying to pin this horrid event on conservatives. And in light of the news that is coming out, I feel it is about to leave a big stain on the “loving liberals”. Something else to consider, wait until the right wing host start posting pictures of the Huffington posts/Dailykos crosshair maps, as well as all the militant statements the liberals have used through the years. I feel the left have just dished Obama a steaming bowl of feces that he is going to have to somehow try to turn into a palatable sandwich. The left is turning into a huge thorn in Obama’s side.

Independent,
My comments about Cali's personal hatred were wrong. My coments concerning her irrationality towards Sarah Palin are spot on. The left's general disgust and hatred for the woman is irrational, just as it was for Bush, and just like some on the right's for Obama. Your previous post about McCain was irrational as well as beeing patently false, so I would say you fall under the category of those with whom it is impossible to have a sane debate.
Citizen,
I'm not sure where the diatribe comes from. Most of your comments are not related to what I said. Your's, or anyones, right to believe as they choose is guaranteed. The founding fathers concerns were that a specific denomination (Church of England) would not establish a state religion. My comments, however stand, Our founding fathers were Christian (though some had deist leanings) and any casual reading of their documents and intents for this nation can not be discarded by thos who wish it otherwise.

Tod -

If you believe that Palin consciously referenced "blood libel" out of some sort of anti-semetic mindset then you are deluded. If not, then what's the connection, and why even bring her up?

I never said that she was anti-semitic, nor did I say that she had an anti-semitic mindset. I stated that she used an anti-semitic phrase. There is a difference between the irresponsible use of a phrase, and making an accusation about the actual person. You would do well to learn the difference.

My point in bringing up Palin was that she made a very bad decision in her speech. I never once said that she was anti-semitic, but her choice of words was incredibly irresponsible. This is merely another example of her lack of leadership qualifications. An intelligent political leader would stay away from words that hold strong, negative connotations and illicit painful emotions within certain minorities. If I accused her of anything, it was bad judgment. However, it seems that you feel my opinion of "poor judgment" means that I am irrational.

Next time . . . read the post before jumping to conclusions.

@Research Solves most problems, There is such a thing as Government run health Care. While this is not labeled as such, basically it is. When people come off private health care "insurance" and get on to Gov't backed Health care "insurance", which is mandated that everyone gets Insurance. The only option sometimes is Government run Insurance like medicare. It has broke too many countries, and this bill is patterned after some of the worse. Call it what you will, but it is still Government run Health Care.

I was wrong when I spoke of trillions, a couple hundred billion is the estimate right now, and that I can assume is a very conservative estimate. Nothing that the CBO ever estimates is correct. Usually though it is grossly underestimated. This will be paid for from yours, and mine Tax's. This does have some reform in it, and I did not mean to infer that it did not. But, is 2000 pages really what is needed to get the reforms that are required.

Some Companies are already saying they can not afford the cost increase from this "reform", and will have to drop their offering of insurance, because the fines will be cheaper then the increase in cost. What happens then when people can not afford what level of health insurance that is mandated? they are then given money from the Government to get this health insurance, and it will be from agencies that are Government ran. a number of health insurance companies are already saying they will get out when these costs increases kick in.

I do watch the news, but I get my news from a variety of sources, and decipher what I can believe and not believe. No one source is reliable. I also see and read a lot of this from various sources on the internet, and what ever other source I can get my hands on. The U.S. government web sites, don't always provide the best information. remember this is close to 2000 pages, and the language is very ambiguous. We might not know the real cost, or the real effect of this far reaching bill for years to come. I do agree with helping those that can not afford good health care, but what this comes down to is anyone can get on this, and I do not want to pay for those that can pay for health care themselves.

What this should have been is finding ways to reduce costs, and outlawing common practices that insurance companies tend to do such as preexisting conditions, and limits in health care spending.

"An intelligent political leader would stay away from words that hold strong, negative connotations and illicit painful emotions within certain minorities"

An irrational person would make a statement like this about a person she despises, and discard those coming from a person she adores. Even ones that referred to over 1/2 the population.

"cling to their guns and religion" "enemies" "they bring a knife, we'll bring a gun'

Your adoration would probably would probably anull any honest converstion about leadership qualifications.

I wonder if Obama would have made such a spectacle of this tribute, organized by a Democratic political function, if it was a Republican House person? While I applaud his appeal for civility for all, his parties obtuse and illogical attempts to link the actions of a crazy person who was, according to friends, not political, to verbage by any politician of either party, is offensive and a sign of desperation after the midterm shallaking. Sarah Palin was demonized unfairly by the left, for days about this and when she responds, they only continue to dig themselves a bigger hate hole; so much for civility.

Tod -

None of your examples hold strong emotional ties with minority groups that faced tragic events. Thus, the comparison is null and void. You need to work on your debate skills.

Here's a pro tip for you . . . find a time when Obama used a term that specifically relates to the struggles, persecution, torture, and murder of a minority, and you will have an argument. But it needs to be a comment that specifically relates to a dark time in history, not a generic comment. Apples to apples, my friend.

BTW . . . the quotes you use can be compared to the generic hate rhetoric from Palin, ex: "reload". I admit that both sides are responsible for this type of talk, and make no excuse for either. I also defend the argument that Palin was NOT calling for actual violence, she was using an analogy to make a point. Thus, I support that the shooting was NOT her fault. Her irresponsible reaction, however, is a different story.

@thoughts from cali, what are we calling some terms off limits now, even though the term was used correctly? she was accused, and falsely I might add, of inciting this act. There is no evidence what so ever of her involvement, and evidence is coming out that speaks to the contrary. This nut job was anti government, like timothy McViegh. And another point to make is the Tea Party is not anti government, or anti constitutional. They are for small government, and a strict reading of the constitution. Not a liberal "interpretation" of the document.

I felt Palin was right in her remarks concerning the false accusations, and right on the money about the term Blood libel, she was accused of having blood on her hands with what this guy did. And like so many have eluded to since yesterday, she only used about 10% answering the accusations, and the other 90% speaking about how this country has gone through this type of debate for hundreds of years, and that this government was set up for devicive debate. We all have opposing views, and only through debate are we able to come to some sort of compromise. Sometimes it gets heated, we just can not take things people say literally. When things happen like they did on saturday, the only blame should be on those individuals who act outside the law.

I don't agree with most things that come out of her mouth, nor do I agree with most things that come out of most peoples mouths in the heat of a discussion. It doesn't mean I am right or that they are wrong. We just can't go trying to place the blame of one persons actions on someone else just because of something we think they might have meant. And I think if most people were honest here, they would admit that they have themselves an unnatural hate for this lady, and most of what they are saying comes out of this hate they have for her. I am personally not too fond of her, but I don't hate her. I am just defending her right to speak, just like I would defend yours, no matter what came out of your mouth. I feel if the KKK, the Black Panthers, and the nut job from the westboro church have the right to say what they want to, so do you and I. And Sarah Palin.

To Tod-2791955:

Your response to mine and others (not in your line of thinking) is exactly correct as I stated about your "Tunnel Vision" or "Blinded Vision". You see only what you want to see and then use twisted manipulative tactics without a logical debate or facts to place negativism on others in order to make you or your party appear as if they never do anything wrong. And that is what I call limited thinking. It is 100% factual that McCain and Boehner were not present at the memorial event. McCain represents the State of AZ (fact) and should have been there as was the Governor. We do know where Boehner was (Fact: attending the RNC Party). But at this time, I do not know where or why McCain did not attend an important ceremony in his own State (which is usually something that commentators will make a brief comment). Furthermore, why is it that you feel the need to be so condescending with all who disagree with you? Can you not debate without the negative, name calling tone? So many people are sick and tired of hearing or reading the negative campaign techniques that most often comes from the right side and occasionally from the left as well. You appear to be suffering from the very failure that you are so quick to ACCUSE OTHERS as having. Nothing else can be said when you are so unwilling to listen with both eyes and ears open. "There are none so blind as those who won't see" and I might add to hear as well. I am neither a Republican, nor a Democrat; and I find it hard to have any trust in a Party when such distasteful tactics are used.

Don -

I never once said the term should be off-limits. My God, can any of you actually read? I said bad judgment . . . I did not say "off limits", I did not say "no one should ever say it" . . . I said it was a bad choice of words. Furthermore, she is free to make as many bad decisions as she wants. She can say whatever she wants to say . . . but there are consequences to her decisions. This is politics, you have to play the game.

Now you, and Tod, and Sarah all seem to think that "blood libel" is a generic term used to describe a false accusation. And that is fine . . . you can think that. But there is a large minority out there who will take personal offense to the comparison. You can argue all you want that she just means "false accusation", but history has left a scar on this phrase that places an emotional meaning on it.

Again, you can say whatever you want (I feel like a broken record here). Go ahead, say it . . . but this is politics, and your decisions affect votes. Her poor judgment will cost her Jewish votes. No matter how many times you try to defend it by saying that it just means "false accusation" you will still lose votes from those offended. THIS IS POLITICS, THIS IS HOW IT WORKS.

In case you didn't notice, Palin only has support from the far right. And Obama has support from the far left. The moderates will decide the next election . . . and offending a large group of people is not the best tactic to win over moderate votes. Thus it was a bad decision on her part. Again, you can say whatever you want, but in politics there are consequences to what you say . . . people cast their vote based on what you say. She is pushing people away instead of rallying them to her side.

As for your comments on the Tea Party and blaming them . . . I actually said that they are NOT to blame. I merely commented on the Palin reaction, and her poor choice of words. So I don't know where you came up with that.

Cali,
I am well aware of President Obama's caution when speaking concerning "minorities". I was not aware that your "pro" comments were only limited to comments that supposedly insult minorities. I am tired, and much of the nation is tired of walking on eggshells over everyone's percieved feelings.

@An Independent Thinker. Sir I will agree with most of what you are saying, but what I and a few on here have said , and what you are tending to forget, is what happened during the Bush years. The Reagan Years, about Cheney. I have never heard as much hate coming from people about their own leaders. I agree that the Clinton years, and what was said about Mrs. Clinton, was just as equally vile, and what we are now hearing during President Obama is equally as bad. While I do not agree with the policy that President Obama has adopted, I do not wish him ill will, because how he goes so does our country. I wish every president had 8 years of very successful policy, because the worse their policy is for our country, the worse our country becomes. We have enough problems taking care, or lack there of, of our poor.

The economy is in the chit hole, and all we can do is spend beyond belief. Bailing out companies that should have gone under, or at least should have adjusted their habits, and not continued to give out millions in bonuses. Most of our representatives in my opinion vote with their back pockets, and not with their heads or their hearts. Though I am against the health care bill, I do wish there was someway to help the poor who can't afford basic health care, without spending Billions, (lol, that is for the other guy who called me on my trillions remark, see I can change my remarks. :-)) and not doing much for what should have been a short quick health care reform bill. Yes Bush didn't do much to help our economy, but there was a major war that hurt our economy.

I also wish everyone could live in their own houses, but if you are making 25-50 thousand a year, you should not be going after a 200 thousand dollar house with a balloon payment. Thank you ACORN, Clinton, Bush, And Obama.

Given that though, there should never be anyone calling for any one to be killed. And Palin could have used better terminology, But, I do agree with her in saying that it was not meant to be "a call to arms", (her words, right after it was said. Not even a seconds worth of pause, either). But, even that being said, this type of hate speech is our fault. It sways the vote. When WE hear the disgusting things that come out of some politicians mouths, we don't speak out against what was said and not vote for the person spreading the hate, we tend to sway in our thinking, and say, "really, Christine O'Donnell was a witch?" and vote for the one spreading the hate speech. It works, so Politicians will use it. So don't blame Palin, or Obama for using the rhetoric, blame society for going with it. And by all that is good and Holy blame the nut for taking the law into his own hands and killing innocent people, and changing the lives of countless others.

@thoughts from Cali, look at your own words, if it holds such a bad connotation for Jewish people, (which I have yet to hear one person of the Jewish faith speak out against her words, and In fact have heard some say that they have no problem with it being used) then you are saying that we should not use it, and it should be off limits. But, i will give you that and say that I misunderstood your meaning. I apologize for that. The meaning of the word was kept in context when she used it. I am not the speech police, and I can not chose and pick her words for her, and neither can any one on here. She has gone through a few days of the accusations being thrown directly at her, and after days of letting the words fly, and people accusing her of hiding, she came out to defend herself, which any sane person would have done. But, for the Palin haters, this was not good enough.

Blood Libel - The blood libel is a false accusation that Jews sacrifice Christian children either to use the blood for various "medicinal" purposes or to prepare Passover Matzoth (unleavened bread) or for vengeance and mock crucifixions. It is one of the central fables of Anti-Semitism of the older (middle ages) type. The blood libel is a phenomenon of medieval and modern Christian anti-Semitism, but spread to the Middle East as early as 1775, when there was a blood libel in Hebron. A second blood libel occurred in Damascus in 1840 and one occurred in Cyprus in the same year. As the blood libel was the subject of folk ballads and literature, it was not simply a religious superstition in Europe, but a staple of popular culture, like most anti-Semitic prejudices.

this was from a Jewish web site. IT is a false accusation, though it was originally was used to describe falsely the practices of the Jewish Faith. I can see how she used it. people were falsely accusing her of using so called vile terms and imagery, which they misinterpreted, to further hers, and others political careers. thus the blood from the attacks was used to further her agenda. This is what she felt was being done, and she was defending herself. If you think she could have used better words, then that is your right. But, like I said, Not one Jewish leader has come out to condemn the remarks, and I have heard a few back her on the use of it. So, in closing, why are we arguing about her use of it? I don't feel she was comparing herself to the Jewish people, but she was seeing the act of falsely accusing her actions, as a sort of Blood libel that has happened before in history, and we are doing it again. We didn't learn from it happening before, and are doing it again.

Peace, Sweetheart. I do not mean to put you down in any way. I am just trying to provide a different point of view. Maybe we should all take what not only we say, but what our leaders say with a little more understanding, and stop trying to pick apart each others words, and assume what was said means one thing, and open our minds a little.

Hope you took this in the way I meant it.

@Don Walters

I appreciate some of your thoughts.

I still think there is a little confusion when you use the term Government Run Healthcare. What I read at healthcare.gov is that all people are required to buy health care, the only health care providers are private companies. Since it is required to buy health care, there will be people who can not afford insurance. If these people meet a minimum ("Tax credits to make it easier for the middle class to afford insurance will become available for people with income between 100 percent and 400 percent of the poverty line who are not eligible for other affordable coverage." - healthcare.gov) then they will be eligible for tax credits that will help reduce the cost of premiums.

This is the facts when it comes to government run health care. If you want to debate on the idea of forcing people to get health care, or the poverty line limit, or the making tax credits available to low income families then I believe this will be a constructive debate because it is based on truth.

Regarding the CBO estimates, if the CBO is to always getting there figures wrong, then they should be fired, because our politicians or making polices based on their estimates. However, even the most successful companies have forecast organizations, that try to make educated guess on future volumes of cars, retail shoppers, and etc. They too tend to get these estimates wrong. All I'm saying is they are the best at what they do (they better be because our tax dollars are paying there salary), and right now they offer the best information possible to hopefully create policies that save this country money. Additionally, 2000 pages seems over the top, for a bill, but this is limit is relative. I've been in presentations were 5 pages was too much. Lets focus on the bills goals not on how many pages it takes to create the law.

I also read that major companies are saying they will cut insurance for employees because the rates carry to much cost. As a result, they delayed major portions of the bill, to help companies like McDonalds transition more easily. However, there are some small business tax credits that have been praised by small business because it has reduced the cost of their business structure. (www.news-journalonline.com/business/money/taxes/2011/01/12/tax-credit-could-help-small-businesses-with-health-care.html). In either case there will be some businesses that don't like it, while others do, but the bill is not perfect, and it can always be amended to make it work as much as possible for all businesses tax structure.

I think it is good to cross check information from multiple sources, but often times we forget to use the original source as a source to cross reference. I encourage you to just check out the website, healthcare.gov.

@ Research Solves Most Problems

I do agree that the more sources you can check the more informed you can make your decisions.

The CBO was created within the legislative branch to be independent. The head of this office is appointed by the speaker of the house, and the Senate pro-tem. He can be removed by resolution, but who is going to do that honestly, unless they don't agree with the persons politics. IF the majority is there and likes his results, he tends to stay in office. Though history has proven that their numbers are underestimated, (and have been on most things they look at) this is always after the fact. it's just the nature of the beast. They can only go on the things they are given. When the Bill hits the true light of day, they tend to find that they underestimate things by a wide margin. I do occasionally look at .gov sites, though admittedly not the one you are referencing. Though I tend to take them as well with all with a large grain of salt.

I knew some parts of the bill are being delayed because of logistical problems like the one you have stated. It still does not qualm my fears of a state run system. When the state gives you private companies even to buy insurance from, it is companies they suggest, and are ones that might be padding their pockets. I jut don't trust that. It does not give you the choice to get the insurance of your choice. It is about freedom to chose what health care is best for you and your family. this does not provide that option. Though, I will admit, I need to look further into that. This is a 2000 page bill, and most of it will not be clear, until it hits the streets running. Just don't trust that way of doing things either. Way too big of a bill, with too many questions.

While some are dropping coverage, even though it may be delayed, the possibility is still there to sooner or later force those into one option only. That being said, I will never agree with this bill, because they have gone way to far in what they can do. What should have been a reform of health care, they took it too far in what they are trying to do. We still have no idea how far reaching this bill is. The only way to find that out is when all these parts are finally put into place and only then will we reap what has been sowed.

I, and almost 60% of the people thought they went too far with this bill. those are the facts. Even though I agree with you that 90% of the people wanted some kind of reform, (I don't think you can find anyone with any sense out there that will not agree with that) Most feel that this bill is far to intrusive on our rights, and has gone too far into creating a state run system. We might disagree on the semantics of that statement, Only time will tell. slow change in my opinion is better then whole sale change. Reform what is desperately needed, and Go from there.

The biggest thing is, though, the tax credits always come from you and I. whether they are people who can't afford it, or companies that drop their coverage, the tax credits will come out of our pockets. Sounds too much like Medi-care. and Medic-aide. Both systems are in trouble and need reform themselves, and we add just one more thing onto the books, that will be underfunded, and drive up the budget just to survive, since we already have too many people being put onto the system.

Let business provide their own coverage, and let them fund it in their own ways. Find ways of reform to reduce costs, and not find ways to reduce visits to the doctor, and what will be covered, like HMO's. Too many doctors already don't accept HMO's, medic-aide, and medi-care. Now there is one more thing for some Doctors to steer away from. Sounds scary doesn't it? I have been in the health care system for too long, and seen too many people shoved out the door on Government programs, and seen too many hospitals, and Doctors not deal with these programs because they loose too much money. I have yet to see one Government run program that actually succeeds. And my money is not on this one to succeed either.

To Tod, Don Walters, and all others inclined with their thinking:

By Palin's own words in the 8 minute video: "Each individual is responsible for their own words and actions." So, too, is Palin, as long as she wants to live in a glass house just like any other politician or high profile celebrity. The Constituents have the full right to criticize their leaders rationally without the violence or hateful words heard by talk show hosts, other such media, politicians, and the public. And Yes, I do remember the Bush/Chaney years. Who could possibly ever forget those 8 gestapo like years? For those who expressed an opinion or told the truth, their spouse was "outted as an agent, or they were arrested, and some even disappeared never to be heard from again. Freedom of Speech was never tolerated from the White House during those days. But then there was nothing they could do when the shoe was thrown at Bush when visiting a foreign country. There were more foreigners who disliked and distrusted his policies than in our own country after they acted so hastily to go off to war with Iraq over WMDs that never existed . Many lives were uselessly lost and money, too, for a costly war that never should have existed. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. And who are we to say what other countries are to do and say, esp. when this Country is going through a serious Recession. It is our task to encourage peace throughout the world. But our Country should never be expected to be the Robo Cops patrolling the World. So now we are paying for those far too quick actions taken with the biggest Recession for the aggressive and reckless behavior that was demonstrated by those two leaders over the past decade. They gave themselves even more power to make decisions without Congress to include passing legislature that would pardon them from any possible war crimes. Or did you forget that already? And then to think, the right wing feels that others have no right to express their opinions about the reckless actions made during that period, because only they reserve the right to such an allowable ticket. For anyone else, it was and still is considered diatribe for the liberals to do the same. All politicians live in a glass house and should be held to higher standards of conduct. Obama's entire family (to include his children) have taken the heat long before the election, and we have yet to see him throw anyone in jail to include proceedings from not going ahead concerning the alleged war crimes of Bush and Chaney. If Palin can't take the glass house heat, then perhaps she should retreat to an environment more to her liking.

You are a brainless dolt. You are obviously a woman, I am embarrassed to be the same gender as you. Read over your post and try to spot the inconsistency. Nope, too brainless. Did you too faint at the sight of Obama?

For those who had a problem with the clapping and cheering.

They were cheering because Gabby opened her eyes and is showing response. That is a reason to be cheerful and happy. He recognized the heroes, this was also a reason for cheering. He recognized the ones who died.

This was a memorial service, not a funeral. Bringing up great memories of the dead is supposed to be cheerful. Wishing and hoping the hurt and wounded will get well soon, should be cheerful.

Looking for a reason to criticize.......have no place here.

To maryann-2898911:

You assume way too much for such a crass remark above that shows little intellect. And to think that we have served more than 25 years in service to protect your freedom of speech and the right to vote. Grow up little lady (??) and start showing a little more maturity before making such foolish and trite comments. You just might try showing some respect for other opinions, too, which does not mean that you have to agree. Or are you not capable of communicating on higher plane of intelligence????

It would be really impressive if the posts on this forum could be about facts, issues, and circumstances rather than name calling. calling someone a dolt or brainless is just name calling. It is not contributing to increased knowledge or awareness of the issues at hand. Please try to discuss facts, issues, and circumstances. Name calling only adds to the irritation all of us are feeling about the issues of today. It does nor add understanding or offer choices and solutions.

To maryann-2898911:

I might suggest that you go back to school to learn how to read correctly and to communicate on a higher plain of intelligence. It is such childish school yard comments as yours above that cause such divide, disgust, and distaste for the other side whatever that may be.

@An Independent Thinker

Of course you can remember the Bush years. But do you remember that we went to war in Afghanistan because of Sept. 11? And Intel also told us that there were Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq, It was later found out that there wasn't, anymore. What do you think Saddam Used on the Kurdish people? Laughing Gas? You have a way to vilify the right, but when the left does it, you sure do forget, or twist it into being a just cause. Do you remember Bush being Hung in effigy? Did we profit from any Oil over in Iraq? You can twist and slant the war all you want, But by doing so, you are not doing our service men any good. Even if you think you are. I grew up during the Vietnam War, and heard all the people call my father a Baby killer, and though he was never spit upon, I saw many cases of men who were.

You can call your vitriol whatever you like, but all I have seen in your posts are hate for the right, and looking the other way about the left. You are one of the people on here causing divide with your comments. You call the right on all the hate speech, but when your side does it to the right, it's ok, it's because of War Crimes. Obama has used his own hateful words, calling the right enemies, and if they bring a knife, we'll bring a gun, Both sides do it. it's what some of the people on here are saying. We are not defending Palin for using those images or words, but we do know that it did nothing to cause this tragedy. There is no proof of it at all. If there is proof, where are your sources? Bring them forth, and enlighten every one. Both Sides do it, From lately, all the way in EVERY election to the revolutionary war. In fact today's rhetoric is really civil compared to what it used to be.

Label Bush a War Criminal. there again you have no proof, just baseless accusations. Even other countries had intel that Iraq had WMD, Like I said what do you think they gassed the Kurdish people with? Besides that, Iraq proved to be a destabilizing force in the area, and needed to be neutralized. There again You provide hate when there is no warrant for it. War is not a clean and easy action. People get killed, both Friendly, and innocent civilians, especially when the enemy is using them as human shields and hiding among them.

The recession was started by the housing crash, do you know what Acorn is? why did fanny mae, and freddy mac put people into homes costing a couple hundred thousand, when they were making less then 50 thousand, and then OK the loans with balloon payments. Obama was part of Acorn while he was in Chicago. And the deficit, Bush spent less in 8 years, then Obama has spent in two, bailing out Companies that hid the housing loans in lump exchanges and when they finally came due, you forget about this, and just blame the economy on Bush. It's an old song and dance, and has been proven wrong. Yet you have nothing to say about the massive spending that Obama has done.

Once you get off of one side of the road and open up your eyes maybe you can see that Bush sure didn't do anything to help the economy, (and I will be one to blame him for that) but we went into Iraq in good faith, and lost a lot of people there, and would dishonor them by pulling out. Something you anti war zealots know nothing about. And if you backed up and looked at things honestly, and took the whole picture of what Palin was doing, you would see that they had nothing to do with a calling to arms, she said this herself less the a second after she made her remark, about reloading. And the map she put the "cross hairs on was explained right under it. But you chose not to listen to the whole thing just what fits your baseless arguments.

Maybe you need to go back to school instead and learn new ways to argue also. not just baseless accusations.

and Independent thinker, who was arrested for speaking out? name them. Who wasn't ever seen or heard from again? name them. If this was true don't you think it would already be in court, or congress would have already had a series of hearings on it. Remember the House was democrat for the last 2 years, and the senate is still. Why hasn't these things been brought out? or are you the only one that is privy to this information? I understand someone was outed as being an agent for us, but someone is already serving for this, and Bush refused to pardon them. but, either way, Bush was responsible for what his people did, and should be held responsible for endangering their lives. But, still no information was brought to light after. They just retired, and ended their careers. which I agree was wrong.

Remember all those documents that wikileaks has and is releasing, we have yet to see anything really damning from them, just a few things that Mrs. Clinton has done that can be called suspect at best. Nothing proving anything Bush has done wrong. Again, If you know anything about debate, you brought the accusations, no provide the proof. Or your just making false accusations, and your words hold no weight. Most of the people on here with logical arguments provide resources. Just saying. No disrespect meant.

Definetly an embarrasment for the President to inject himself into this tragedy. And then to have a teleprompter while he delivered his "speech", was a slap in the face of the family and this nation.

You have no idea what you're talking about. There was no teleprompter.

WE CAN BE BETTER!

Thank you President Obama for once again demonstrating you’re the only adult in the Room!

The voice of calm and compassion amongst the sea of insanity!

Your speech last night lifted many heavy hearts and gave us a sense of direction as we move from this senseless tragedy!

God Bless Congresswoman Giffords and may her amazing recovery continue!!

I have a candle burning today to honor Christina Taylor Green, I too want America to be as good as she imagined!

Christina was a star whose light was eclipsed far too early!

It was a wonderful memorial address, poignant, reflective, inclusive, inspirational, spiritual. His tribute to the 9-year old girl was beautifully woven into a message of hope for America's future, for its children who are that future.

During his introduction of President Obama, the University President said that President Obama took office at a perilous time and that we are blessed to have a man of his intellect and his heart to lead us through. They were honest words.

Feisty;

Our President last night reinforced our belief in his leadership and the love he has for this country. His speech had something for all and it provided hope and compassion it this most dark of times. There will be the naysayers out there. There always will. I for one will no longer entertain the useless name calling and hate. They have become irrelevant now and I will ignore them as I would any minor annoyance.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

Navy

I was both proud and humbled by his words. I saw images of hope, cooperation and a coming together of all people for a common good. I feel we should heed his words and take them into our hearts. President Obama has laid down a challenge for all Americans; "We must make an America that lives up to our children's expectations." “We must not let those deaths be without meaning” (I paraphrase).

Your post is outstanding and so indicative of what I think is what most Americans felt and think in their inner visions.

In spite of attacks from all sides, President Obama will continue to take the high road. And so will we!!

Great post Navy.... it feels like a good day in America... I sincerely believe/hope that the victims didn't die in vain.... and from this tragedy comes great healing to their family and the nation.

US Navy - The choice is ours.

How true. I can only do what I always do - ignore the nasty ones and reach out to those who want a conversation - D or R. Arguing never solves anything any longer. They aren't going to change our perspectives and we aren't going to change theirs.

We got it right this time. We elected the right person as our President. Everyone else pales in comparison.

The entire ceremony was beautiful and moving. All the speakers (yes, including AZ Governor Jan Brewer) gave wonderful speeches of faith, bravery, sacrifice, and reconciliation. The blessing reminded us that faith, though sounding strange when it comes in words with which we are unfamiliar, is a universal tongue, a mark that unifies all people of faith.

The President's remarks put the capstone on that memorial wall. His words personalized the victims. His inspiration to do better as a nation for them should speak to all of us.

I was glad I watched every minute.

John, it looks like this past week has been very tough for Gov. Brewer. I was very moved by her words.

Wonderful address, Mr. President.

On a side note... Something jumped out at me when I was watching the camera's scan the crowd. Check out the pictures of Kyl and McCain sitting behind the President... I believe the most apt description for their expressions would be 'contempt'...

This at a Memorial... Is there a reality show for 'Men Behaving Badly'?

McCain's old. Cut him some slack - my grandfather looks like that no matter what his mood is.

US Navy Disabled Veteran Retired

Thank you sir, your post said everything that we Tucsonans are feeling today. Thank you for your service to our country

Lyn, the only "off note" I saw were those tee shirts.

Whose idea were they?

I do NOT blame Obama for them- I thought he looked a little surprised himself to see them.
Whoever thought up that idea should be fired. No matter who it was.

No Joe, I know what you mean.

When I first moved to the southwest, it was a bit jarring to see (very) casual dress at memorial services and at weddings.

Then I learned to look at the person and the attitude rather than at the clothing. It still stands out, but it isn't as foreign any more.

fielden,

NO JO wasn't talking about the attire, she was talking about the Tee Shirts being passed out at the Memorial.

It was a good speech, but why pass out T-shirts for a memorial? It almost seemed like a pep ralley than a memorial.

I was, indeed, talking about the tee shirts that bore the motto. "United We Thrive". I am willing to believe that someone affiliated with the college had the lame idea that they would add something to the memorial, and hope that those responsible are chastised.

I hope that EVERYONE on this board agrees that, should this be the reelection campaign theme, it be denounced, categorically, by all- and whatever aide is responsible be invited to seek other employment.

It was a bit unusual for the college students to cheer everytime the Univ. of Ariz was mentioned, but I had no complaints with anything. I am thankful for all of the speakers and their words.

I'm not adding to anything others haven't already said, but I was really moved by the service. I think Obama got the pulse of the circumstances perfectly. I'm proud of our President.

What a fitting tribute to the victims and heroes of the tragedy. He brushed on the topic of civility in our discussions and politcs. Certainly out of this terrible act there can be talk about how to deal with mental illness or perhaps sensible gun control that could help prevent these shootings? More than that, as Obama implored us we need to move forward without demonizing those who hold different opinions as an example for our children.

Who couldn't have been moved when the President said, "She opened her eyes for the first time today."

What a fine human being President Obama has proven himself to be. I am proud to stand under his leadership. Thank you Sir for stepping right up when we needed you most and for delivering precisely what we all needed to hear. I am behind you 100% henceforth. The "alternative" presented itself in a pityful and lamentable way that is not even remotley Presedential. I am happy that aired as well as the comparisons can be made. There is NO comparison!

I doubt the organizers of the Memorial had anything to do with the t-shirts. It was at a university and likely students who are young and enthusiastic saw it as a means of "uniting" a traumatized community. There is nothing offensive with the words "United We Thrive" on t-shirts. This was not just a memorial, it was a celebration of the lives lost--I found it a wonderful mix of serious, sad yet hopeful enthusiasm.

Jody.

as the Tee-shirts were placed there by the organizers. although i dont find anything wrong with them. they were infact placed there by them...

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/political-theme-t-shirts-at-memorial/question-1443813/

Please visit the Website and see them being placed over the backs of the Chairs.

Great post Bev...

Akins

Great post Bev...

Thank you Tunde

However , I should have made my paragraph about the last when I edited it. To me emphasizing how the GOP/TEA BAGGERS and Sarah blew it; kinda took away from my intentions.

I wanted to remind FT posters how I once asked us-- "to turn our pain into power". that was the day I called us comrades meaning of course friends. Boy did I get skewered that day and called a commie.

Nevertheless, your posts and so many, many others who post here are attributing to that phenomenon with their well wishes for the victims and pledges to stray away from negativity.

Enjoyed your post.

I was disappointed that Speaker Boehner chose a fundraiser over the Tucson Memorial Service but I will give him the benefit of the doubt. He had great difficulty reading his speech in Congress yesterday during the tribute to Gabrielle Giffords; perhaps emotionally, he did not feel he could handle a memorial for such a tragic event. He issued a statement yesterday saying that he would leave the fundraiser before the President's remarks. I do think he will regret his choice but it is he who must live with it.

Thank you Tunde

However , I should have made my paragraph about the GOP/TEA BAGGERS and Sarah last when I edited it. To me emphasizing how the GOP/TEA BAGGERS and Sarah blew it; kinda took away from my intentions.

I'm not a good typist either.

Bev;

Very well put.

Just what exactly did the GOP blow?

Just about everything.

John-1894652: I like the way you put it. No more words are needed. Anything else would take away from the positives of yesterday.

We need to keep the good vibe going...

Bev, you are an idiot. Not much else to say about it. You are a prime example of WHY the nation is so politically divided. Keep up the good work. With your urging I'm sure we'll all be in the streets killing one another soon.

The speaker of the house, is the leader of the house, it's that simple. If a Marine or police officer is killed in the line of duty please believe there Commanding Officer and Police Chief will be at the memorial service. With the gavel comes added responsibility.

Jack-2510943

Bev, you are an idiot. Not much else to say about it. You are a prime example of WHY the nation is so politically divided. Keep up the good work. With your urging I'm sure we'll all be in the streets killing one another soon.

Gee, I thought that term referenced our current Speaker (Weeper) and lush of the House of Representatives, John Bohenor; and half- wit half-governor, sneaky little lip stick mouse, IGNORANT, non-factual soon to be gone into oblivion, fake @ZZ wannabe president, Sarah Palin.

fielden,

Would that be the continuing slamming of Republicans or the speech by Obama? Obama's speech mentions enough with the blaming and yet you people continue to do so (not saying you fielden). It's beyond belief, it's like you people hear what you want to hear.

It's kind of like, Obama tells you not to touch the stove, it's hot and you touch the stove anyways and blame somebody else because you touched the stove. It's amazing the logic you people think.

"We need to keep the good vibe going..."

Jack,

Did you think Bev watch the speech with that comment below? Don't mind her, she has a lot of hate and some racial issues too. Just look at her posts........................like the good Deacon John B preaches

Language as consequences--unless you're friends with the person that uses such language. Isn't that right Deacon John B?

"Gee, I thought that term referenced our current Speaker (Weeper) and lush of the House of Representatives, John Bohenor; and half- wit half-governor, sneaky little lip stick mouse, IGNORANT, non-factual soon to be gone into oblivion, fake @ZZ wannabe president, Sarah Palin."

Paul-Florida casts another vote in favor all-attack, all the time politics.

Paul-Florida

He called me an idiot. His language, to me, was inconsequential.

Bev; I wouldn't be too harsh with Boehner for opting out of the ride to Arizona, the GOP gathering was planed some time in advance and it would have meant rescheduling a lot of GOP members who had made the effort to come to Washington. They could have worked around the inevitable bad press by setting up a simulcast. I am not a republican but he should be cut a bit of slack to work out his new found constitutional status. (right behind Biden in the succession line-up.)

I am unsure why so many think President Obama had lost his 2004 voice.

I couldn't agree more Jody!

It's nothing more than a distraction for the chattering class!

Jody;

Touche'. Our President never wavered from is principles. Did he compromise feeling that a piece of the pie was better than none? Yes. Did he maybe give away more than he wanted to? Yes. Did he reach across the aisle? Yes, and he pulled back a stump for his efforts.

The bottom line, the economy is moving forward, slow but in a positive direction. Private sector jobs are being created and unemployment is at 9.4%. The outlook according to CBPP, EPI and just about every economist of note is that it will continue and maybe be a little stronger because of the Tax Cut Deal.

I agree with you, Jody---I don't think the President lost his "2004 voice." In fact--I think that is one of his strengths---he is consistent in his principles and message. In political matters I think he is a chess player, always thinking several moves ahead.

But last night was not a chess game---it was a time of both mourning and celebration and I was so moved by the President's remarks. I hope they help the people in Tucson and indeed the nation begin to heal.

This is a sad day but there are a lot of sad days in neighborhoods all over the country. I bet no one on here can state how many people were MURDERED in L.A. last year or even in Chicago nor Houston.

There are a lot of people that do not see this incident as a National tragedy. Go tell that to the numerous African American mothers across America's ghetto's that their kids to whom were MURDERED are not considered national tragedies.

I was watching the news last night and 1 dude shot and killed 4 people along with 2 innocent bystanders injured but it will only make the local news because they were minority gang members and the bystanders were also minority. This was mentioned for about 1 minute and then it was back to the Arizona story.

What I'm saying is there should be EQUAL emphasis placed upon every MURDER in this country whether it was a public figure or just kids from the 'hood'. Everyone's life is just as important.

I would like to know what exactly are the criteria for something to be considered a national tragedy?

The country could have a serious conversation about this but we aren't going to do it.

A true and sobering point InTheMiddle. . . EVERYONE'S life is important.

We should never forget that.

ITM, this may be the first time I've voted for one of your posts.

Well said and you're absolutely right.

ITM makes a good point.

Everyone's life is just as important.

Agreed.

There are roughly 15,000 firearms homicides every year. This figure includes lawful homicides (police, self defense etc)

For me, the real tragedy is the 43,000 people killed every year (that's 113 people every day) that die on America's roadways.

I can assure you, the agony and grief felt by those who have lost a loved on in a car crash isn't any less than the grief of someone who is killed by a firearm.

If the media gave the same coverage to these car crash victims, then measures would be taken to make traveling on the roadways a lot safer. To paraphrase the gun-banning folk, who needs a car that can go 100 + MPH? Who needs a motorcycle that can blow by those cars?

Finally, I would love to learn how many people are killed or maimed every year because someone is texting while driving. In my mind, that is reckless driving and an act of criminal manslaughter.

IntheMiddle, TX

Everyone's life is just as important.

This is the first time I ever gave you a thumbs up; cuz you are so right.

ITM;

I agree with you and Nash. Every life is equally important and we should never forget it. Good post.

ITM ~ Agreed, wholeheartedly. I've been banging this drum for a LONG time. To me the real tragedy here is that it had to take the very public death of an innocent 9-year-old child to wake some people up.

And even worse, it didn't even wake some people up.

That brought tears to my eyes Jody and beautifully written and your right the" voice" has always been there

keepertrout, thank you for your kind words.

Good Morning Grimey!

Your comment is about as good as it get's... THANK YOU! ;o)

Thank you Frank for your wise words.

Frank- in the spirit of the address last night, let me say to the more CONSERVATIVE posters that appear here regularly, more specifically,

No No

JoAnna

Spanky

Steve

InTheMiddle

Bill, Fairfax

Bob and so many, many more:

All of you do have one common trait that makes you someone special and worthy and good- You are all fellow AMERICANS!

Frank "Grimey" Grimes, Springfield, USA

I know a lot of the more liberal posters have often said in the past that many of us conservative posters can’t say anything good about President Obama.

he gave the message to NOT use this to turn on and blame one another, but to use it to strike a better tone moving forward. In all three cases he was spot on. From a conservative and a McCain voter, four simple words: Thank you Mr. President!

Frank your honesty and heartfelt thoughts are exceptional and greatly appreciated.

Thank you

Frank;

Nobody could have said it better than you. Thank you. The voice of reason has rung true again.

Grimey: you know that we all exclude you from criticism since you are intellectually honest, right?

Frank, you are a democrat at heart... you just don't know it yet....;)

Just playing... I find that I actually agree with you more than we disagree, even though we are on opposite sides of the game.

There's always more common ground - a peaceful place our politicians seem to ignore. Unfortunately that is where the will of the American people is.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Grimey---it is much appreciated. I hope everyone can take the President's message to heart. I know I will try.

Well, that was as close to a perfect speech as I’ve ever heard.

I didn't see your words as I was typing and as it turns out, you and I said the same thing.

Tunde...No...I am undoubtedly conservative, I just take a different way of looking at things:

1. Just because someone has a "-D" after their name doesn't mean I blindly disagree with everything they say. And I am allowed to say something positive about them every once in a while.

2. Just because someone has a "-R" after their name doesn't mean I blindly agree with everything they say. And I will be critical of them from time to time. (See: President George W. Bush, Re: Deficit spending)

3. I believe that the two parties have a heck of a lot more in common than they'll ever let on.

4. I hate that it's the two extremes that garner the most attention in politics. There's a lot of us that reside much closer to the middle of things.

5. I show respect to public officials...whether I agree with them or not.

Everyone else: I appreciate the comments. In all honesty I'm just speaking my mind here. I'd have been unhappy if the President had dragged politics into this or made it into some sort of rally. But he didn't and I thought he struck a perfectly appropriate tone.

Thank you, "Grimey". Your voice speaks volumes here. Thank you.

Grimey... I'm whole heartedly in agreement.

Thank you Frank. My hope is that this can be a turning point, a signpost marking the place where we moved away from the "I win if you lose" way of politics and toward a period when we can agree quickly on the majority of things that we seem to hold common on any one issue, and work on compromise for the other points.

Frank you just gained a fan. Not because your statement is on my side of the fence, but how you said it and how you carry yourself. You are right in saying that we are more alike than not. I hope you have a good day and I will try to follow your spot to see your thoughts on things.

Frank; Thanks again and you are correct, the D, R, I, means very little now. We are all Americans and to disagree is in our nature and it is to be fostered. Can you imagine how boring and stagnant this world would be if we all thought the same.

John B: I agree with you as well. Maybe we have reached the fork in the road. One can hope and President Obama gave us that hope yesterday.

God bless President Obama, and help the victims of the Tucson massacre with the healing of their wounds.

And Got bless you Grimey, for being a voice of reason. We need more people like you on both sides of the aisle. With more folks like you America could truly realize it's potential.

oops, sorry for the typo. It should read "God bless you Grimey.."and I mean it.

Thanks Frankey: thats exactly what we need more of!

DBO,

I have always Concider all of you Fellow Americans, That is not the Point, We have all Called each other all kinds of names, so be it,. we are all big kids and can take it.. Today i will Tone down my words as i wished that some on the left would have done. However I must call out One of your Liberal Friends here Bev. she didnt seem to get the Memo..

The Presidents Speech last night hit all the Right Tones. he is very good speaker and in many of the Emails i got from many of my conservative Friends it seems that we all agreed. He did a Good job and hopefully the country will listen. Both Rs and Ds.

As the President so eliquently said last night . No one knows what was is in the mind of this Deranged Killer and no one deserves any Blame for it but him..

I noticed there are a few people here commenting on how Boehner and perhaps some others attended a fundraiser rather than the event in Arizona. Did any of you think that the fundraiser was most likely planned a long time ago?

Get over yourselves!

Get over yourselves!

Personally, I'm grateful that Boehner showed us where his priorities lie!

I saw an op ed in the local paper last night, the title was "what if we have a Great president and no one notices." I have believed that to be true for sometime and it has nothing to do with his powerful memorial tribute last night.

"What if we have a Great president and no one notices."

Thank you Jody for sharing this with us. We do have a unique interesting man in the White House. A man we can't compare with anyone else who has sat in the Oval Office.

I have to keep reminding Democrats to tune the BS out.

I think back to the left and the way they have treated President Obama and I wonder about something. President Bush turned out to be incompetent and I have gotten the impression for quite sometime now that the left had decided somewhere along the way to dictate to him, our president, what he can and can't do. Who he can and can't negotiate with.

Yet the GOP has been doing the same thing. Where he can and can't go on vacation. What legislation he can and can't under any circumstances, pass. It's been going on for two years.

It's not only been ugly, it has as well been extremely condescending.

I saw over the weekend parts of a talk with Jonathan Alter and someone on the left do a program on CSPAN. Whoever this guy from the left was, was unbelievably crude. He more or less called Jonathan an Obamabot or something. Mr. Alter did not sit there defending the president's every move. He kept talking about what President Obama could have done differently.

But apparently this wasn't enough for this leftie. Jonathan Alter was respectful which this guy neither liked nor appreciated.

Jonathan Alter. A truly decent journalist who is not one to so quickly buy into the inside the beltway talking points. He has his own mind and isn't one to be easily caught up in the latest BS.

Pat, you're welcome. That title really caught my eye and hit home. The op ed mentioned how the left has treated Pres Obama almost as badly as the right despite all that he has accomplished in a hostile environment. I have seen some far left liberal guy who just cannot say anything positive; maybe it was the same guy; disgusting fellow. The name escapes me but he has even written an anti-Obama book. Jonathan Alter, Richard Wolfe, Howard Fineman and others disagree respectfully; they offer their ideas on what to do but always with civility and respect. That seems to be missing in too many analysts. Republican David Frum, on Lawrence O's show last night, praised Pres Obama's speech, had only good things to say about it.

Ask Speaker Boehner.

JoAnna,

Grow up...please.

Come on everyone...

Let's ALL quit feeding the TROLL!

President Obama - 'We Can Be Better'!

JoAnnaSmith1

Well, it certainly is all about Obama.

Joanna Please get to the Hospital as fast as possible, i don't know how you have lived this long with out a HEART!!!!

you are beyond help.

JAS1, it appears from your post that you are someone who tries to hide the warmth and light from the Sun with your finger.

Try to live a happy life!

@Feisty: I said "please".

JS1,

No, it’s all about you. You post comments that will draw attention to you. You not only want attention you need it to stroke your ego. You and nothing but YOU !!

Could we please all just ignore this poor soul?

I told you 5 minutes ago this would happen from the usual source. These people are not worth our time to respond to any longer. Ignore them, they say nothing of substance.

Well, it certainly is all about Obama.

It is certainly fortunate that this opportunity came along for Obama to show us all how wonderful he is at reading a speech. He's got the chin in the air, looking down his nose at the audience thing going again too, so it looks like he's all set to start his re-election campaign. I guess we should consider this the kick-off. The theme is "Together We Thrive", correct?

People like the above have no intention of being part of the solution, so ignore them. If you do not feed their little egos they will wither and blow away.

JoAnnaSmith1

Well, it certainly is all about Obama.

Wrong again JoAnnaSmith1 it's about us (Americans)

He's got the chin in the air, looking down his nose at the audience thing going again too,

No one can see you but can certainly say you are looking down on others; constantly.

Really, it doesn't do you much good to mock one's physical traits.

What do think about Jimmy Carter constantly blinking his eyes? Or George Bush's giggling at inappropriate times?

JoAnnaSmith1 you're one of the most flawed posters here.

...that's really all you got out of it, Joanna? Christ.

Chin in the air.

Funny, I saw that exact comment on another website.

@

JoAnna, I assume you are an adult but you behave as a petulant child.

JoAnna, I assume you are an adult but you behave as a petulant child.

One with a very dirty diaper.

Joanna -

Your not worth responding to. This is my final response to you. Goodbye, your just an empty suit hanging in the air.

He's got a big ego, like most politicians, but he also works very hard and really digs deep to deliver insight to the American people. He may be annoyingly gifted, but he also has an impossible job. You have to admit, his wife is very nice, which suggests he's quite human after all.

She beat you guys again, all she wants is for you to comment on her posts. If you'll stop commenting she'll go away.

I would agree with most posters here that the president gave a fine, moving speech last night. Quite frankly, that's what I expected because he is so very good at public speaking. I thought the highlight was towards the end when he spoke about the 9 year old, jumping in puddles, making a government that would have met her expectations. Very moving for me.

So don't get me wrong as I switch gears a bit, the president rose to the occasion and gave the speech the country needed to hear. But besides being an excellent speaker, the president is also a consumate politician. And in that regard, he expertly played the civility card last night. So as we get back to business in Washington next week, Republicans will have to tread more carefully than perhaps they anticipated a few weeks ago.

And that's why Tim Pawlenty's was right on the mark when he said: "We got to be really careful here because if you start saying, 'You can say this, you can't say that; You can use that tone, you can't use that tone,' then pretty soon you know you start to discourage, maybe chill, intimidate." Republicans can't let the president beat them into docility with a civility stick.

So Boehner has his work cut out for him. He'll have to navigate through a new minefield that could explode in his face with any misstep. On the one hand Republicans can't relent in their mission to undo the Obama agenda. On the other hand, they can't let public opinion turn against them by using trash talk that could aliennate folks in the current climate. Say what you will about civil political discourse being a good thing, it's also provided the left with an oportunity to play some hardball. And since thay haven't been winning many arguments based on the merits, they will try to preserve their agenda by not letting the current crisis go to waste.

Good to see you back Mo!

You were missed!

You are absolutely right Bill, but I will add just one thing. . .

The left need to adhere to the same rules.

If you take a look at SOME of the posts here, there are those on both sides who seem to have not gotten the email.

JoAnna: I have argued with you before. But now I realize that no matter what, some people just never will "get it"

Thanks Feisty, just got sick of the hate and lies around here. Hopefully we'll will be more civil to each other.

If thats what you got out of his speech last night--I feel sorry for you

You have a problem with that theme, JoAnna? Because just look around. Separateness and individualism ain't cutting it.

Maybe together is worth a try.

By the way, I don't agree that this comment should have been collapsed. JoAnna should have been made to defend this in full public view.

AM: You have a problem with that theme, JoAnna? Because just look around. Separateness and individualism ain't cutting it

So AM, do you think that was the appropriate venue to kick off his campaign?

And individualism is certainly being targeted by the Left. Why can't we all just be the same, correct? Same houses, same income, same health care, same schools. It would make things so much easier, because you know, that diversity thing just causes problems.

JAS1,

What, exactly, is your point?

IR:

I have read almost all your posts and often think this one is your best work. Today's post truly is your best work.

IR;

I ditto what Ron said. Great post.

Independent Redneck Va.

I have to echo Ron and Navy. There is just no way one can diminish the President's speech by comparison.

Thank you for the links. I get hoping Rush Limbaugh will implode. I read somewhere that oxycotion causes constipation. I guess this is why he constantly grunts. All it takes is one good grunt for him to implode;maybe.

Great post, IR; thanks for sharing. I am not sure there is any way to reach the people on the extremes any longer but I hope that the people in the middle who can be reached were able to hear the President's words and take comfort and hope from them.

IR - great post. I share Steeler Fan's thought - there is no way to reach extremists any more. Hate speak will continue. It is up to the voices of compassion and reason to speak loudly, strongly and clearly so that those irrational voices will no longer be heard.

Thank you IR. What a stark contrast between men who were seeking to help a nation heal and those who seek gain through wounding it more gravely.

Can't we turn our backs on the extemists and shove them back to the margins, where they belong?

Another excellent post, IR. The words of both presidents unites us in common grief. The words of those who hate divide us and prevent a common purpose. Which shall we choose to heed? My hope is we choose the words of two different presidents who both wanted to unite us.

I have posted this before but this seems like an appropriate place to put it up again.

Believe nothing

No matter where you read it

Or who has said it, not even if I have said it

Unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

Buddha

Yes we can John B. But the media will have to stop giving them a platform on which to speek.

Mo even if the Media gives them a platform all it takes is for us to simply not listen to them. Then the Match box will collapse and the Media will have no further reason to give them a platform and Advertisers will have no reason to pay them.

Well said IR. Now lets put it into practice.

One Question,

Who was it that Blamed everyone but the killer for his Actions. who was it that Said that it was Rush Limbaughs fault. Sarah Palins fault Hannitys Fault O'Reilys Fault, Fox news Fault. Who was it that said it was the Republicans fault. All while Diverting Blame from the killer Himself..

Answer this Question Honestly. Dont Attack me for pointing out this Obvious Question

and tell me . What President was it that Said No one is to blame but the killer himself.?

Steve, none of us here have ever said the shooting was anyone's fault except the shooter, none of us blamed Palin or Limbaugh or any of the others. What we did say was that vitriolic hate speech can and often does send the deranged over the abyss; what we did say was why not take this opportunity to dial it back, turn down the volume. Why is it hard for some to grasp the concept that words have consequences?

Independent Redneck Va.

"Mo even if the Media gives them a platform all it takes is for us to simply not listen to them. Then the Match box will collapse and the Media will have no further reason to give them a platform and Advertisers will have no reason to pay them."

IR you have the correct idea but let's help the advertisers out.

Let's start by writing them and letting them know that continuing to be associated with divisive "infomercial of hate shows" will lead to us boycotting their products and spreading the word to others to also boycott their products.

This seems to be one of the few methods that can actually cause them to question whether their dollars are being wisely used or if it will start to negatively effect their bottom line.

No other method seems to have stopped the proliferation of hate and divisiveness so maybe informing the advertisers that their bottom line is in jeopardy will get them to open their eyes. We can only hope that this will help to quiet at least some of the nonstop hatred being spewed.

Thats not a Very Honest answer Jody,

Go back and Read the posts of your Friends. go and watch Video of those at MSNBC and many other news Stations. Most were looking for a link to this guy and the Tea party . and Republicans.

Now you have stated that it was the words that caused this you have the Right to Speak for yourself and i respect that. but please dot speak for Everyone . Because your Words are not True When you say . NONE...

Jody.

With all Due Respect. Tell me again what words have consequences. What words caused this guy to do what he did. Who is it that you believe said these words.?

Steve you asked for an honest answer and I’ll do my best to give you one.

Over the years I competed quite a bit in shooting events. Still own a cabinet full but I don’t shoot a lot anymore because of the company that you are sometimes forced to keep in that environment. So I have a long been aware of the various Militia groups and the irrationality that that they put out.

If you do a little research on the Oklahoma City bombing and McVeigh you will find a definite connection between the Michigan Militia, their irrationally and the reasons he committed his irrationality. Being aware of this I’m also aware of the connection between the Militia irrationality and Limbaugh’s and several other Irrationality. One fuels the other.

Sunday while I doing research on trying to understand this tragedy I had occasion to peruse some of this young man’s writings. While it was quite obvious that he was severely mentally ill (as was McVeigh) there were some of elements of this Rhetoric imbedded in them. Even the things in the minds of the mentally ill do not magically appear. Might get a little twisted but they come from somewhere

So while I have not in particular (and am not now) trying to lay blame to those particular folks although I am aware that some have made a greater leap in that direction. Just the same as I saw a bunch of posts back yesterday saying that the young man was a Liberal because one of his friends said so or some such. My point is that it is the irrational Rhetoric pushes folks to do things that rational folks wouldn’t. The responses by Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and quite frankly some of my fellow posters here seem to be to me irrational and don’t seem to be designed to help heal our nation or the people affected by this event.

Now let me ask you a question in all seriousness. Would it make you’ll feel better if this was a Latino who went down and shot up a Militia meeting because he heard voices and though they were going to come get him? Would it make you fell better if it was a Muslim suicide bomber that set off a vest in the crowd because he thought the Government was going to shut down his Mosque?

It is the irrationality that disturbs me.

Nice poNice post IR. The difference between someone who is national elected and people selling soap or their own brand of hate is simplely amazing.

Roadhead I agree with that but I would like to add that even before we write a letter we need to go back to judging these things for ourselves. If it sounds that irrational from either side of the spectrum just turn it off, tune it out or crank the volume down so you can’t hear it.

Thank you Wakeup good to see you again.

Fielden thank you from yesterday too

Wish I could stick around longer but duty calls I’ll see you’ll tomorrow Take care

Independant,

So then when the president of the United States said that if they bring Knifes We need to bring Guns. We need to Punish our Enemies. ect ect ect. When the Democrat leadership council Placed a Map with Bulleyes on it back in 2004 Targeting Republican Districts .

That was all Irrational, as you state in your post above.

and again. Who. was it that Blame these people from the Beginning, Who did they point the fingers at

And to answer yoru last Question. I woudln't be happy if it was Anyone that did this type of thing. This type of Violence is not acceptable anywhere..

I mean. if you hate the speech You have to speak out against everyone that does it. Including the President who himself has used this type of language

Good post, tedor. The temptation to attack each other is great, since we are all anonymous. Maybe today of all days, we could give it up.

I've been a supporter from day one and will be continue to be a supporter. How about you? And BTW, who did I bash? You need to read what I wrote instead of act on your emotions. It's moments like this that people fail to see how divisive people are (those such as Sarah Palin) and how they have eroded American Politics. Stop defending this woman by attacking others. It's a shame that some fail to see beyond their own party.

Louis J- perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote. I said nothing in my post about defending Sarah Palin, being a conservative does not automatically mean that I stand behind her. Personally, for me, she is just another politician that is in it for herself.

It's a shame that some fail to see beyond their own party

Just by this one statement shows you are not ready to move on.

Tedor;

Thank you for your kind words. We are in this together and the time has come to join hands and move forward together. This unfortunate event has lead many of us to look at our own rhetoric and that is good. Even some of the talk show people are doing the same. Others not, but that is the way of our Nation. The President has given us a challenge and I for one have accepted it and will try to do better. That does not mean that we have to compromise on our beliefs, just be civil and open to discussion. It has never been true that one party or one individual has all the good ideas. Ideas come from all so lets talk. I am Italian and I like to talk.

Take a deep breath friend, just take a deep breath.

Thank you Navy- This country of ours will never move forward until the art of true compromise is reattained. Like you said, neither party has all the answers, but working together, anything can be accomplished. Hopefully, we will see more true dialogue coming from our elected officials, and not more of the same political posturing we have seen over the last 30 years or so.

I did not get the chance last night to listen to the Presidents speech. Just from reading the comments from this thread and others, he did a remarkable job. Time will tell if it will make a difference.

To all, have a great day and stay safe.

Tedor;

Back at you. Be well and stay safe. Your words ring true and I will be with you. If you stumble I will support you, If I fall I look for you to pick me up. Your are right, together this country cannot be beat, we have beaten the odds time and time again. This is what makes us the greates Nation on the planet. Seems every now and then we loose our compass and hence or way, but we do eventually find it again. Time will tell.

Stay in touch I look forward to your ideas on other matters before us as well.

Tedor:

Evidently you haven't been reading on here but a minute.

tedor, well said. I agree. Many of us try to post comments to make both sides think. Unfortunately, the minute someone attacks, the discussion desolves into a heap. I have often said that neither side has all the answers, all the ideas; both sides are necessary to achieve the best ideas, the best solutions for the good of all. None of it can be achieved by simply yelling and criticizing the other side.

That said, it has taken years to reach the vitriolic and poisonous political discourse we have today and it will take time to get us back to a less toxic environment but if each of us works at it, we can return to disagreeing without demonizing.

Tedor - you may want to look at Navy's posts from earlier in the week. He was one of about ten or so posters here that pounded the drum of blaming Rightwing rhetoric for the tragedy in Arizona. These despicable posts are archived for all to see. One of these posters has since backed off on his claim the shooter was an avowed Tea Party member, and I respect the apology that person made in a post. Others on the Left though continue their rabid accusations that the Right is to blame for this tragedy, and as the week has progressed, that notion of theirs has become more and more absurd.

JoAnna Smith, I would suggest you re-read your own posts and analyze what you can change to improve the discussion; no one is exempt from the need to step back, dial it down, change the tone and that includes you.

JoAnna, we are ALL to blame. And we can ALL change this. We can all fix it, if we really want to.

Not so fast, JoAnna. I hear there are right-wing bloggers claiming that this event is cause for celebration, and that it may have been the start of the "revolution." Maybe they didn't cause this particular incident, but how about the next one? Curiously, I don't hear about ANY left-wingers claiming that. As long as you're denouncing those on the left who blame the right, I'm waiting for you to denounce that kind of talk, too. I suspect I'll be waiting a while.

The hero of your side, Rush Limbaugh, said the other day that Loughner has the support of the Democratic Party. You know that's a lie, JoAnna. Go ahead and disavow that one, too, while you're at it. If you dare.

I also hear that Loughner had a copy of Mein Kampf on his book list and/or among his possessions, and perhaps -- emphasis on perhaps -- it's no coincidence that Gabrielle Giffords is Jewish. I don't think we have all the answers quite yet. But I also don't think it helps matters much that Sarah Palin invoked the concept of "blood libel," yesterday, do you? It was insensitive at best. Time will tell if it was also inciting. For someone whom you seem to admire so much, JoAnna, Ms. Palin seems to get embroiled in these controversies pretty often, wouldn't you agree? Do you think that's just an accident, or is it just possible that she is her own worst enemy?

By the way, you also accused me of blaming the right, but without a single post to point to or other shred of evidence in favor of it. I know you remember it because, unlike me, you seem to remember everything you write. And we know how you think, JoAnna. And Jody is right that you, too, could benefit from a bit of self-reflection.

@ Tedor ~ Okay, but that's an merely argument about an argument. I'd be interesting in hearing anything of substance that you might have to add to it. That's what we need now.

One more question for you, JoAnna, being as you are the font of all wisdom, regarding Rush Limbaugh's statement as mentioned in my post above, that Jared Loughner has the backing of the Democratic Party.

What possible purpose could that statement serve than either (1) deflecting criticism; or (2) inciting anger against among his base? If he's not guilty of anything, and in his godlike righteousness, he feels no need to deflect criticism, then I have to conclude it's #2.

Someone must have set him up. Isn't that always the way? Because he couldn't possibly have said something that vicious, irresponsible, or stupid on his own, could he?

AM: Not so fast, JoAnna. I hear there are right-wing bloggers claiming that this event is cause for celebration, and that it may have been the start of the "revolution." Maybe they didn't cause this particular incident, but how about the next one?

AM, the focus from Day 1 Hour 1 has been the Left blaming the Right for the tragedy that occurred in Tucson. That is a fact. It has been the drum beat of the media, and of the Liberals here and on other boards. If Rightwing bloggers are blaming the Left for this tragedy, they too are wrong. The main goal of the Left this week has been the attempt to connect the tragedy with the Republicans/Conservatives/Tea Party. That much is true.

You ask if this rhetoric wasn't to blame for this tragedy, what about the next one. That's an excellent question.

So what do you suggest?

I wrote yesterday and asked about how can we function as a society, and how do we can communicate as a society if we have to consider the lowest common denominator, the deranged person, each time we attempt to communicate. Just what external stimulus, if anything, sets off a deranged person? If we temper our communication to not provide that external stimulus to the deranged, just what exactly would our speech consist of? Do you see the issue? You can see there are no absolutes to describe what type of rhetoric is acceptable, and what is not acceptable. Where would you set the bar?

AM: By the way, you also accused me of blaming the right,

I'd have to go back and look. If you have, I think you're wrong. If I blamed you for doing so, and you haven't, I apologize. There are a certain set of people here that clearly attacked the Right with no evidence (and still none exists) and no justification other than their bias and their hate. Look through the last weekend posts after this tragedy occurred and you will see some of the most vile and hate filled attacks.

And I don't listen to Limbaugh.

You did, and apology accepted.

Since we can't predict what external stimuli will affect the deranged, perhaps we ought to, as a society, take more care in creating the stimuli. As for the bar, all I know is that I sincerely doubt anything I say incites anyone to hatred of others or violence. As for Rush Limbaugh, that's his self-appointed job and he gets paid to do it. If he stopped getting paid and given air time, I suspect he would stop in a hurry, or alternatively, no longer make a difference.

But claiming you don't listen to Limbaugh doesn't make him go away. A hate-filled attack from the right is no better than a hate-filled attack from the left. I would denounce both, not just criticize one and ignore the other.

Give it a try. You might feel better. I know I would.

p.s. If we can't control the stimuli, perhaps we can at least control the mechanism. This goes back to my argument about the guns. The consistent element in all gun crimes is guns.

We can't control who's mad. But madmen (and women) without guns can't commit gun crimes.

fielden: JoAnna, we are ALL to blame. And we can ALL change this. We can all fix it, if we really want to

Really? All of us are to blame? I guess I disagree. How can someone in say New Jersey be responsible for the actions of a deranged person in Arizona? I guess people need closure, need a reason, need an explanation, to feel they understand why tragic things happen. In some cases with tragic events though, they just occur, and there is no closure, no reason, no explanation. This tragedy in Arizona is looking more and more like that kind of an event.

In case I'm incorrect, I'd like to know from you how we fix these things, because the lofty rhetoric and the goal of doing so are fine. What do you propose we do?

AM, ahh, so now we're getting some where! An actual action plan as it were. You've set the bar at Limbaugh, and if he's gone, you're saying things will get better. So how do we get rid of this "evil" man, especially since he seems to be the core of the problem, at least from your point of view. And if you've determine that Limbaugh is the problem, do others get to choose who they think are evil too, and of course they too must also be gone?

And how do we make them all be gone? Should the government do the dirty work? But the government has to deal with that pesky Constitution and all those silly amendments. That may not be the best route. Well, how about driving down their market? That may not be the best route either, I believe Limbaugh has quite a sizeable set of followers. Protests? Good luck, I think he's used to those. And you're against gun violence, so that's out.

Doesn't look like Rush, or anyone else, is going anywhere. We might just have to learn to deal with him.

AM: sincerely doubt anything I say incites anyone to hatred of others or violence

Really? Remember, we're talking about deranged people, so how do we know what external stimuli really sets them off? Could be some quite innocent things, like say your perfume. Who knows, right?

AM: The consistent element in all gun crimes is guns.

Ahh yes, guns. Lets get some more gun control laws. To go along with the thousands of existing federal, state, and local gun laws we already have. You'll have as much chance of controlling guns as you do controlling Limbaugh.

You're taking on a big responsibility trying to deal with this problem AM. So what do you suggest, you know, your utopia, an authoritative state? What do think about, say Venezuela?

AM: We can't control who's mad. But madmen (and women) without guns can't commit gun crimes.

But Loughner checked out. No record of mental illness.

Again, so what do you suggest? The people around him knew something was wrong, but the man was an adult, so what were they to do? Do we have everyone go through a mental evaluation every couple of years, and if they don't pass, are they required to accept help? And there are a lot of "different" people out there, just what is the threshold of potential violence that the "authorities" in these cases will be looking for? And are those "authorities" responsible if someone slips through the cracks, as they will do?

We've got those silly HIPAA laws that protect people's medical records privacy that will need to be reworked too.

And do you realize the expense of doing such things in a country of over 300 million people?

JoAnn,

Under Arizona law, any one of Jared Lee Loughner's classmates or teachers at Pima Community College so concerned about his increasingly bizarre behavior could have contacted local officials and asked that he be evaluated for mental illness and potentially committed for psychiatric treatment. ]Arizona has one of the most expansive mental health laws in the country, allowing any person, concerned about the mental state of another to petition local authorities to have the person evaluated if they are a danger to themselves or others, if they are unable to care for themselves, or if they appear to be mentally ill but may not know it. The school, and his instructors definitely dropped the ball. Rather than expelling him, and saying he couldn't come back until he had a mental health clearance, they should have taken direct action. To tell a person who's mentally ill, and thinks he's not, to get a mental health assessment is ludicrous. His math professor who said when he wrote something on the board he was afraid when he turned ariybd Jared would have a gun. He should have done something. It's pathetic. Unfortunately with Arizona's budget cuts they have just reduced 50% of their mentally ill population from having access to physicians, therapists or medication.

What rescue dogs62 said, JoAnna. In every one of these cases in recent years, SOMEBODY knew that there was a person in trouble. Somebody who could have taken steps, but didn't. Virginia Tech comes readily to mind, for one. Blame them, the ones who didn't do anything. And blame Jan Brewer, not me. I'm not the one who opposes funding for mental health. Enforce those existing laws. You're all for that, aren't you? Gun laws, too, I presume. And while you're at it, throw some funding at it. Or wait, it's too expensive to pay for health care, isn't it? Just a cost society has to bear so the rich can have their tax cuts.

Definitely NOT Venezuela. Not too Communist; too humid. And there's probably snakes and stuff that are sensitive to girly-girl perfume. Really. I hear they really like roses and jasmine. Or moon flowers.

But keep going. Pretty soon, you'll talk yourself right into the answer.

Just get rid of guns. Other countries manage without them. Japan, for example. Imagine it. Imagine, for example, that the Second Amendment is not specific to guns -- because it's not. Imagine that the Second Amendment means the right to bear slingshots. I keep hearing that if we took away guns, people would just use something else. I assume that "something else" would qualify as "arms," otherwise, why bring it up? Well, then, just let them bear slingshots. It would be a good start. You wouldn't get off too many slingshot rounds before a crowd would disperse. If everyone had nothing but a slingshot, they'd probably get tired of their silly macho games of aggression pretty fast.

Get rid of guns and I won't worry that much about Rush Limbaugh any more. If he gets hit by a slingshot, it would probably be his own fault, anyway, just like the Tea Partiers are saying it's Gabby Giffords' fault for not having enough security. Even though they'd be against funding it. After all, getting hit by a slingshot is just the risk you have to bear to serve the public. Rush Limbaugh should display AT LEAST the same level of nobility, don't you think?

By the way, I didn't set the bar at Limbaugh. You did. I would set it much lower than that. Or higher, depending on whether we're talking about craziness or morality, in that order. You don't seem to get it. Rush Limbaugh's spewings are not protected by the First Amendment. In fact, as a radio jock, he's subject to FCC regulation. But we cut the guts out of that during the Clinton administration in favor of the free market. The fact that the free market doesn't know better than to give Rush Limbaugh a forum is exactly what's wrong with the free market.

Wow AM, you really are shooting (oh, hope that didn't instigate someone into performing violence) for an authoritative government. You certainly are ready to throw out the Constitution, at least the one we have in the US. Where you are at on the political spectrum is clear to see.

So what are your views on fascism? Right? Wrong? Effective?

And rescue dog, thanks for the background on Arizona and its mental health position.

There's nothing to be said when someone's already said it all, is there Da Noid?

Da Noid

America, are you listening?

Great question, Da Noid, I know of two specifically who aren't. One would be Sarah who came out of hiding to post an inflammatory, anti-semitic video in hopes of ginning up here base.

The other is the House Majority Speaker, Jon Bohnoer who thought a RNC cocktail fund raiser was more important than being at a memorial for one of his injured House members.

This man is shaping up to be a House Majority Speaker who is not capable of listening, leading, or laying off the booze.

Hey, da nod?

Bev is not.

Sadly, not everyone is listening.

I did / I am - I promise to listen better, to agree gracefully to disagree. This citizen hears my president's words and I promise to be a better citizen and to encourage the citizens around me to better. I promise.

I, too, have a candle burning in memory of all. I agree, this is a day to reflect rather than attack. I hope tomorrow can be another.

Come on everyone...

Let's ALL quit feeding the TROLL!

President Obama - 'We Can Be Better'!

Quit feeding the troll---check

Feisty- she IS an AMERICAN, too. That gives her SOME worth.

JoAnna- whatever makes you happy......

Stop feeding the troll, acknowledged, over and OUT!!

Mandatory shot at Palin

I didn't hear anything Obama said that could have been a reference to Palin. He did talk about rhetoric that divided people rather than uniting them. If an allusion to hateful rhetoric is such a unique trait of Sarah Palin that it's the same as calling her by name, don't you think that's her problem rather than Obama's?

Present.

Houston!: I didn't hear anything Obama said that could have been a reference to Palin

I'm referring to the FR article Houston. Not to Obama's speech.

And the hateful rhetoric theme we've been experienceing this week has been 99.9% coming from the Left in their pathetic attempt to smear the Right and blame them for this tragedy. And the Left is now shocked the Right is fighting back. If Obama wants to be above the fray, he's certainly late in getting out in front of the hate coming from the Liberals this week.

The market on hate has been cornered this week, by the Liberals.

Will they EVER stop playing the victim card?

It's always... ALL ABOUT THEM!

Stop feeding the SUPER TROLL - CHECK

JoAnnaSmith1:

If Obama wants to be above the fray, he's certainly late in getting out in front of the hate coming from the Liberals this week.

Where is all this "hate" of which you speak? I've read some over-the-top comments about Palin or Beck having "blood on their hands" on some blogs, but I haven't heard a single commentator or pundit blame either of them for the attack. What you are doing, JoAnna is what is known as "projecting". You are projecting your own hatefulness on others.

Palin's whining statement about her supposed victimhood and "blood libel" made her look small, petty, and mean. In other words, it was a typical Palin speech.

Feisty;

It never stops does it. There are several here who just not want to move forward and be part of the solution. Best we can do is just ignore them, deny their little ego rants and false accusations about what other people post. Everybody here has the right to post their ideas. Period. It is those who complain the most about what other people write that you should be closely examining as it is typically these people who have the intolerant view.

Houston!: Where is all this "hate" of which you speak? I've read some over-the-top comments about Palin or Beck having "blood on their hands" on some blogs, but I haven't heard a single commentator or pundit blame either of them for the attack.

Umm, Houston!, when one accuses another of having "Blood on their hands", that is a direct accusation that they are responsible. And when the accuser is doing so without an ounce of evidence while attempting to gain a political advantage, that makes the speech hateful.

The following is what Paul Krugman of the NY Times wrote immediately after the tragedy in Arizona. It's a prime example of the tone that was set by the media. Please read it and I'd be happy to hear what you think.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10krugman.html

"One Vision; One Purpose!!

"The Technology of Peace!!!

"Kane lives in Death! Kane lives in Death!!!

"Peace through Power, Peace through Power, Peace through Power...!!"

I had similar thoughts before the program started, Nash --thought it was important to hear the President speak but more from the point of view of a confessed political junkie. But from the moment the Native American gentleman began the blessing, I was able to share the feelings of those people in the auditorium and see how hurt they are yet how much they want to heal. I thank our President and First Lady, as well as everyone else who represented us at the service, for doing their best to help them, and us, heal. I will try to live up to their example.

Same here. My Iowa State Cyclones were on the court last night, but something inside me needed to hear the words of all the speakers. Never underestimate the importance of the memorial ceremony to healing.

I disagree Steeler Fan.

I think the Presidents speech was fantastic and Spot on, but I couldn't take it seriously until after the Native American blessing. I have a lot of respect for Native American traditions and culture, but I'm almost certain he was making that up as he went along.

I just was taken with the image of this gentleman so proud of his roots and impressed with how far he has come-it just drew me in. It is OK with me if he made it up.

Memorial service my ass this was a pep rally how disgraceful for all involved. Gov Brewer was booed and all the other crap that was going on what a slap in the face for that 9yr. old she deserved better. Oh and by the way where was this sarrow at Ft. Hood Mr. Pres. ? I ask everyone where was he?

Bill-742678

Gov Brewer was booed

I only heard her being cheered. I thought she gave a fine speech and the audience seemed to think so, too. Most of the elected public officials on the right have conducted themselves as those on the left, with the pitiful exceptions of Sarah Palin.

Bill,

Everything you wrote is untrue. Please find better sources of information in the future.

Obama Honors Fort Hood Victims as Heroes, Says 'Justice' Awaits Killer

Here is the footage of Governor Brewer speaking on youtube . . . I don't hear any booing.

Gov Jan Brewer At Arizona Shooting Victims Memorial Services

ETA: Oh well, links not working again today. Put Ft. Hood headline in Google and the Gov. Brewer one in YouTube.

Memorial service my ass this was a pep rally how disgraceful for all involved.

Well, things started out smoothly but it would appear this thread, like most very active threads on FR, is destined to devolve.

Well, things started out smoothly but it would appear this thread, like most very active threads on FR, is destined to devolve.

It's a shame... Go to page 3 or 4 and see who didn't get the 'We are Better' memo (if you dare)! :o(

I hear you Nashville and this citizen promises to listen better, to live up to my presidents belief that we can be better. I promise, as a citizen, to listen better so that I might live up to the faith our children have in us. And success to you on your resolution.

Well said, Nashville. I listened to the American Indian's words and immediately found truth and wisdom in them however ackward their traditional way of presenting it. Every speaker was thoughtful and spoke from the heart.

Pat:

Your comments are perfect, simply perfect.

When I look at the weather maps in the Boston area, I wonder how you are doing. Keep warm and dry, and as you have said in the past, "Cheers".

Good morning Ron: We made it through the snow. It's getting colder which I hope doesn't mean we turn into one big ice bowl. Plowing looks good by all accounts. The walking in Boston was great; my hometown was a little rough walking. Businesses hadn't gotten around to shoveling as yet. But all in all - not bad for me. I didn't lose my power so I was able to watch the President's speech. That was what was concerning me the most.

Glad you are OK, Pat---have been thinking of you in the storm. I think President Obama's natural reserve is sometimes hard for people to get---it doesn't mean he lacks feelings but that he doesn't show them as much as, say, Bill Clinton. But he let down some of that reserve last night and spoke even more from his heart.

Steeler Fan: I think you're right. He is very reserved which puts some people off. I like it. I like when a person carries him or herself with a measure of dignity. I remember how the left had been screaming that he was too weak.

Those words last night were not the words of a weak man. They are the words of a mature, thoughtful leader.

Do you suppose we will be meeting up a week from Sunday for the AFC Championship? Can we beat the Jets? Can you beat the Ravens?

I agree, Pat----some people show their emotions more openly. Maybe I relate to that because I'm a reserved person myself EXCEPT when it comes to my beloved Steelers!!! I know we will beat the Ravens in our house and I can't believe you're asking whether you will beat the Jets. I see a showdown in Foxboro in our futures and we will have to come up with a suitable wager!!

I'm asking if you think we'll beat the Jets because I'm a wimp at this time of the year. Lol.

Everything is now on the line. Goin' for it all. Everybody I know thinks the Steelers will have zero problem beating the Ravens. But please, feel free to beat the crap out of each other. We'll try and do the same here in our part of the world. Can't wait.

I thought we'd established that an atmosphere of constant inflammatory language had no impact on crazies?

He earned my vote JohnB...

Sounds an awful lot like CU doesn't he?

Excellent thoughts, Pat.

Paul, why would you do that. Your post started out so well. Did you not understand what the President was talking about?

You really should have stopped after the first paragraph...

NDD - they can't help themselves... look no further than JS1!

Sad, though. I really did enjoy that speech last night. Was hopeful it might slow things down as far as rhetoric.