Skip to content

Dallas Green’s granddaughter killed in Tucson shooting

Jan 9, 2011, 10:03 AM EDT

dallas green card

The tragic shooting spree Saturday at a political rally in Tucson, Arizona has an unfortunate baseball tie.

Christina Taylor Greene, the 9-year-old child who was killed, is the granddaughter of ex-MLB manager Dallas Green and the daughter of current Dodgers scout John Green.  This from Adam Rubin of ESPN New York.

The elder Green managed the Phillies from 1979-1981, winning a World Series title in 1980.  He went on to skipper the Yankees for parts of the 1989 season and then took over for the Mets from 1993-1996.

Christina Taylor was one of six people left dead when 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner opened fire at a political meet-and-greet outside of a grocery store.  13 others were wounded, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who is in critical condition at a local Tucson hospital.

Christina Taylor was born on September 11, 2001 and developed a strong interest in politics at a young age.  She was attending the rally with her neighbor to get a closer look at political life and to meet Congresswoman Giffords.

Thoughts and prayers go out to the Green family and all of those affected.

  1. wonkypenguin - Jan 9, 2011 at 10:11 AM

    She was also the only girl on her little league baseball team.

    • rick1922 - Jan 9, 2011 at 11:06 AM


  2. shutyourfingmouth - Jan 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM

    An amazing but sad story. What a measure of, even in these modern times, just how small a world it really is. How incredible that the little girl should be born on the day of a massive national tragedy and become interested in politics at such a young age, only to die at the hands of a misguided and demented individual. My prayers and condolences go out to the Green family, and all the other families involved in such a senseless act of selfishness and ignorance. May Christina-Taylor Green serve as an inspiration to all who aspire to truly serve the people of this country, and may her killer feel the wrath of swift and merciless justice as he did to all whose lives he took in the same manner. RIP, child.

  3. fribnit - Jan 9, 2011 at 11:49 AM

    Thoughts and deepest condolences go to the families of all the victims of this senseless act of violence.

  4. Utley's Hair - Jan 9, 2011 at 2:14 PM

    Condolences to the Green and Dodger families, as well as the Giffords, Rolls, Zimmermans, Morrises and other victims of this tragedy.

    Hopefully this will be a wakeup call to dial back the rhetoric on both sides of the aisle and bring back civility. I am a proud liberal who disagrees with much—though not all—of what the conservative right has to say or do. But I also live and work peacefully with conservatives who feel the same way, just in the opposite direction, and to varying degrees. It truly is a sad state of affairs when people like this guy decide to take the lives of innocent people who are just trying to make the country a better place.

    Hopefully, Representaive Giffords’ wounds aren’t as serious as they sound, and she makes as full a recovery as possible. Also, hopefully this Loughner will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and they find the other “person of interest” and handle him the same way.

    • Old Gator - Jan 9, 2011 at 2:24 PM

      The rhetoric that needs to be dialed back is primarily on the right side of the aisle. I don’t recall any Democratic or left-wing political ads that exhorted followers by posting maps covered with rifle crosshairs and spoke in terms of target shooting about who to vote against like Sarah Palin’s PAC ads. And speaking of that worthless, blowhard, dimwitted, grandstanding windbag, she’s “praying for the victims” that her brand of rhetoric did so much to victimize in the first place – while, of course, dissociating herself from any responsibility for their fate because the shooter was “deranged.”

      Well, folks, have a read of the “deranged” shooter’s online commentaries, and let’s see you exhaust more than ten minutes matching every statement he he made with some comment by Palin or some Faux News pundit.

      Sorry, but the conventional wisdom that sees “both sides at fault” doesn’t hold up very well here.

      • schlom - Jan 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM

        I blame Luke Scott (as long as we are blaming people who had nothing to do with the shooting).

        Seriously, you come across as an educated man but then you come up with statements that are so stupid they are easily refuted with a 10 second Google search ( I understand that as a partisan liberal you want (or need) to make the Republicans and conservatives look evil but your intellectual dishonesty in this instance is mind blowing.

        Isn’t the fact that you are spouting some much vitriol towards Palin kind of refute your point about “dialing back the rhetoric?” Or since it’s targeted at Republicans it doesn’t matter?

      • Rosenthals Speling Instrukter - Jan 9, 2011 at 4:52 PM

        To blame one side when the left tries to create this anger and hatred towards anybody who has money is beyond ridiculous.

        Actually to blame any of this on an opinion is stupid. The person was out of his mind. How people put this on a talk show host is beyond me.

        Bleeping stupid no matter what side you are on.

      • Rosenthals Speling Instrukter - Jan 9, 2011 at 4:56 PM

        Although if you want to blame it on rhetoric:

        Posted: January 08, 2011
        5:22 pm Eastern

        By Aaron Klein
        © 2011 WorldNetDaily

        “The Communist Manifesto” and Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” were among the favorite reading materials of Jared Lee Loughner, the suspected gunman in today’s fatal shooting that reportedly left six dead and gravely injured a U.S. congresswoman.

        Lougher, 22, listed those tomes among his favorites on his YouTube channel, in which he wrote that “conscience dreams” were a “great study” at his college, Pima Community College.

        Understand what’s happening to America’s culture and what you can do to fight it with “How Evil Works,” autographed, from the WND Superstore.

        One user on Twitter, Caitie Parker, wrote she went to high school, college and was in a band with the gunman. She said she hadn’t seen him since 2007.

        Parker wrote of Lougher, “As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy.”

        She also described him as “more left.”

        Lougher also left a trail of bold political statements.

      • schlom - Jan 9, 2011 at 5:22 PM

        Here’s a better link:

        The sad thing is that the current state of political rhetoric against your enemies is nothing like the stuff that went on during the first years of the nation. Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton hated each other so much they funded newspapers that did nothing but print articles attacking the other – and not rather mild stuff like we are talking about today but vicious personal attacks. I guess you could say it’s part of our political system.

      • indaburg - Jan 9, 2011 at 6:53 PM

        My deepest condolences to all of the families and friends of the victims of yesterday’s horrific attack. When I learned a child had been among the injured, all I wanted to know was: “Is she ok?” My heart broke when I learned she was among the dead.

        @schlom: Well, if you found it on Google, it must be true. If you present some sources that don’t have an obvious conservative agenda, I might be more inclined to listen to your point of view.

        We don’t yet know what agenda the obviously mentally unstable Loughner had. From viewing Loughner’s You Tube videos, his rambling nonsense didn’t really lean left or right. It leaned crazy. Certifiable DSM-IV crazy, not Glenn Beck-Sarah Palin crazy.

        Yesterday’s attack may have had nothing with Giffords’ political views. At the same, this is not the first time Giffords has been the victim of a violent attack. It is not a stretch to believe some of the elevated vitriol could influence some mentally unstable people to act–as they have in the past. Palin can make her point without resorting to such violent symbolism. Did she really need to depict Gabrielle Giffords on her Facebook page in the cross hairs of a rifle scope: “Don’t retreat! Instead – RELOAD!” Was that necessary? Are her constituents that dense that they wouldn’t get it otherwise?

        Like Gifford herself reasonable warned a few months ago, “When people do that, they have to realize that there are consequences to that action.”

      • drunkenhooliganism - Jan 9, 2011 at 7:00 PM

        As millions of the idiots in America were rooting for the killer of this congresswoman to be liberal or conservative or a Mexican who was in the country illegally, I thought a seemingly enlightened man like yourself, Old Gator, would be above that.

        This is not an act from a far right nutjob or a far left nutjob. He’s simply a nutjob.

        blaming broad political ideology for this is ignorant and lazy.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 1:00 AM

        Gator, I agree that the right is more at fault with their gun toting rallies, Nazi comparisons, 2nd Amendment remedies, bullets not ballots, Dems districts in the crosshairs, reload don’t retreat, as well as those angry town-hall disturbances and obstructions. (And Giffords’ 2010 opponent also invited constituents to a rally at a shooting range to take out Giffords.)

        However, the left is not free of fault in this either, with Florida’s Grayson and his Taliban Dan ad, as well as West Virginia’s Manchin and his cap-and-trade target practice ad. I’ll admit that I was one of those pushing for the left to stand up against the constant attacks from the right. But to respond to the angry right with more anger just is not the answer. Respond to the lies and accusations with the truth.

        As for those who are saying that the guy was deranged: yes, it does appear that he was mentally unbalanced, though that has yet to be proven in a court of law. And even if he was, the kind of hateful and incendiary rhetoric can push marginal people over the edge.

        Now, the crap about the 1700s and duels and newspapers to villify political enemies is just out of place here. First, you forgot that Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr hated each other so much that one of them ended up dead at the hands of the other, who ended up a fugitive due to his killing. Second, just because the Founding Fathers did it or said it does not make it right for then or now. You do know that those guys weren’t angels, right? Quite a few had slaves, remember? I seem to remember that quite a few were alcoholics, too. But go ahead and idolize them and keep using the rose colored glasses.

        And Rosenthal: what the hell are you talking about with this spew on rich people?

      • jkcalhoun - Jan 10, 2011 at 9:07 AM

        Krugman is worth reading on this today. Makes a useful distinction between “caustic remarks” and what he calls “eliminationist rhetoric”.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:19 PM

        jkcalhoun: Holy crap…I didn’t know I was suddenly a columnist for the NYT.

      • liberalsarehypocrites - Jan 11, 2011 at 2:35 AM

        If’n ya don’t recall, then jus try a googlin’ it there partner. Pull yer head out of the sand and open yer eyes and listen ta sumthin other than Keith Olberman & Joy Behar. Here’s a start fer ya

      • jkcalhoun - Jan 11, 2011 at 8:32 AM

        liberalsarehypocrites – excellent talking points as always. Thanks.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 11, 2011 at 10:56 AM

        Sounds like a true open-minded individual with that handle. And it also sounds like a gun-slinger from the Old West.

        And the source of that graphic is still missing. I’m not going to do your research for you. If you have a point, make it and prove it. Otherwise, it could be you just making it up.

    • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 8:52 AM

      IMO, anyone trying to pin this on any political party in any way is either A) wishing to create more ridiculous rhetoric while claiming we need less. Or B) really aren’t all that smart. This was one crazy kid, not only was he in posession of Mein Kampf, and the communist manifesto, but also alice in wonderland and other childrens books. He was known as a Left leaning liberal, who shot one of the most conservative politicians in the democratic party. If anything she angered him with her conservative agenda. This is no more the fault of politics than it is the fault of myself. Which political party was Dahmer leaning towards?? I guess whichever party he leaned toward was to blame for his appetite too??? Seriously very sad and unfortunate. I wish the best for all of those involved.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 10:58 AM

        I’m not blaming any party. I do say that the right wing has taken it to a whole new level, but the left has its fault, also. I also say due to the fact that this guy was a.) in Arizona a hotbed of anger and hate due to the immigration crap and Brewer’s whole redefinition of health care, and , b.) he may have been unbalanced to begin with, the angry hate being spewed just pushed him over the edge and caused him to become unhinged.

        I still hold back on the mental capacity part of this whole thing, what with his going to numerous different WalMarts to get ammo, and being rejected from a couple of them. It’s easy to call someone a whackjob or a nut or crazy, but there are legal and medical definitions of them. He might not be. Premeditation on his part like the ammo thing might nip that whole thing in the bud.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 11:06 AM

        I also have begun to think that maybe this anger and hate is somewhat being perpetuated—and in some cases NOT INITIALLY caused—by political leaders and talking heads, since poeple have WAY more access to them now with blogs, Twitter, Facebook, etc. These guys used to be somewhat insulated from the actual hate and anger. Maybe sometimes, so much access isn’t such a good thing.

      • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 11:36 AM

        No, I wasn’t pointing towards you with that Ut. I was mentioning this because I’ve seen a whole bunch of people try to do so. And it is just the worst kind of BS Rhetoric that exists. People died at the hands of a kid who had serious mental issues, and people want to so badly blame politics. Even if he fed off the political atmosphere and he said himself “I did it to kill a democrat” or ” I killed that conservative witch who claims to be democrat”. Nobody can blame anyone but the kid himself. I know it’s sickening what our “process” has become, but it’s not to the point where we have political warfare over it. Well not yet anyway…
        “I do say that the right wing has taken it to a whole new level”
        Both have. Did you see the last round that went through our area?? I know Runyan was still elected but they tore him to pieces in smear campaigns many lies, while Jon’s ads were pretty much about the issues we face in NJ. Utley, you’ll notice it more from whichever side you oppose, it’s a fact. And while the left is in office it’s stronger from the right, and vice versa. it is how is, and always will be. And it’s sad.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:10 PM

        I don’t recall any anti-Runyan ads, Jonny, or any pro-Runyan ones for that matter—which is weird, since we seem to see all of the Jersey ads (not to mention ads for places unknown). Which ones are you referring to?

        I am talking about the ones that outright call for violence, or the ones that simply allude to it with a veil just thick enough to give the candidate plausible deniability, like the ones I listed above (2nd Amendment remedies; rallies at shooting ranges; don’t retreat, reload; crosshairs on congressional districts; referring to an opponent as “Taliban Dan”; target practice with a bill; etc.).

        And just reading some of the comments on here (and other sites, both sports and news), the dustup over on PBT about the Suns wearing the Los Suns jerseys last spring in opposition to the immigration police state crap, the anti-Obama rants on OTB, the crap on PFT last week about Obama talking to Lurie about Vick, and Tucker “String Him Up, ‘Cause I Need Publicity” Carlson—the rants of some of these people are absolutely ridiculous and way over the top. People have claimed that the left did the same thing to Dubya. The worst—depending on how you look at it—I remember being said about him was that he should be impeached and tried as a war criminal. That pales in comparison to the vitriol being spewed toward the Dems and Obama now.

      • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:23 PM

        Bush got it as bad or worse than Obama UT. He really did.

        And Palin’s map is being blamed, but the democrats do the same thing.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:33 PM

        Jonny, you can’t really use that graphic like that. Where is it from…who made it…etc? And how does that graphic support your claim that Dubya got it as bad or worse? I just don’t see it.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:35 PM

        Jonny, I also suggest you take a look at Krugman’s column that jkcalhoun added here.

      • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:42 PM

        I’m not researching it since this is no mission of mine. And i’m not going to argue it either. It’s up to you to believe what you want, because that’s what people do. Bush was torn to Pcs and I know it. Just as badly if not worse than Obama. You just don’t see it because you’re a left winger who wants to see how bad the right is. Just like all the right wingers who cried the blues when Bush Jr. was in office and he was the focus of the Left. It’s bad from both sides.

      • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:50 PM

        Yes I read read that Crap article. And there are tens of thousands of them online half from one side, half from the other. I agree on one point. Talking heads need to stop using irresponsible phrases on national TV. It could lead to another nutjob focusing his sights on another politician. As if that’s what it takes……. But it’s still not cool.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 1:09 PM

        I’m not a left winger. I’m more of a middle-of-the-roader. I see good and bad on each side. Just more bad in the more important issues on the right and more good on those issues on the left.

        Based on the dialogue here, I think we agree on a number of things. However, I don’t see that the left has been nearly as bad in the vitriolic, angry hatemongering department. Not that they are fee from blame, just not as much.

      • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 1:17 PM

        To clarify before I get all kinds of crap thrown my way, though I do consider myself a proud liberal, there are conservative tenets that I do agree with.

      • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 1:21 PM

        And that’s fine. While I would like everyone on earth to agree with me about everything. It doesn’t bother me a bit when that doesn’t pan out. I only injected myself into the topic because felt i was a little more objective about it than the majority of left leaning citizens, and figured i could relay some of my own thoughts. Maybe you’re right? I’ve been avoiding politics for awhile now since Malox stopped helping my stomach when I get into that topic.

  5. warchief01 - Jan 9, 2011 at 6:05 PM

    I don’t know what that punks problem with the government is as i have my own with them but what he did to that child can never be justified. A child is a wonder of God and a blessing.

  6. Old Gator - Jan 9, 2011 at 6:29 PM

    Schlom, if you had a discriminating mind in your brain you’d be dangerous.

    In the first place, I’m no “partisan liberal;” I’ve had more than plenty to say about the stupidity, cowardice and disorganization of the Democrats, as anyone who’s been reading these blogs for any length of time knows. I suppose that “liberal” is a handy label to resort to when you’ve got nothing else in your head by way of an idea.

    In the second place, I’ve never called for “dialing back” the rhetoric. I’ve been consistently frustrated by the refusal of center and left politicians to stop passively letting the right define them for themselves, and made no bones about their need to dial up their own anger at the distortions, lies and bigotry that have been the bread and butter trade of the American right for two decades now.

    Finally, that the right would try to deny having any responsibility for this lunatic was as predictable as gravity. Yes, he was clearly quite deranged. His ravings are nicely nourished by Faux News sound bites and the entire ethos of mistrust of government and the impending need for violent resistance to it – hence the famous Palin “crosshairs” ads and the general pathology of American gun culture – have been the all but trademarked mantras of the right. This ethos suits the paranoid or dissociative personality like thermal underwear in a Minnesota January. That he represented himself as “liberal” or leftist is irrelevant; he might well have done so out of fear that the “government” was watching him, and certainly he didn’t pick his targets because they were right wingers, did he? The framing of his bizarre take on the world in violent terms is hardly the sensibility projected by or promoted by the moderate or left-moderate political factions in this country.

    • schlom - Jan 9, 2011 at 8:14 PM

      Sorry, I didn’t realize that non-partisan liberals used the term Faux News. Or maybe that’s just a typo, right?

      • Old Gator - Jan 9, 2011 at 10:38 PM

        No, you read that right for a change. Even though you still can’t seem to think outside the box. Or any box. You don’t need to be any particular kind of ideologue to look at a farrago of lies and exaggerations and call it what it is. I have the same low opinion of much of what goes on in The Nation. Or do “partisan liberals” say such things?

        drunkenhooliganism: As I said above, yes, he was a nutjob. I’m not blaming extreme ideology for making him psychotic (although if it had, it wouldn’t have been the first time in history that it had such an effect). Clearly, this sick bastard oscillated between left, right, up down and sideways within the ambit of a single mental syllogism. What I am blaming right-wing hatespeak and the right’s insistent use of threatening, violent, gun-happy (as in the Palin PAC ads) vitriolic discourse for is framing an environment within which a nutjob would feel comfortable, if not heroic, crossing the line from being an audience for the riot inside his own skull to acting out his madness in public.

      • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 9:01 AM

        He was Liberal. He killed one of the more conservative Democrats of the party. If anything it was her conservative leaning stance which drove him to kill her. Gator, I love you and all but you’re off base here. He was just a nut job. Plain and simple.

    • sportsdrenched - Jan 9, 2011 at 8:24 PM

      OK, so if he had a bizarre take on the world, why would you blame and indict an entire political spectrum for his behavior? Your grinding acts is clearly not with the shooter even though that’s where it belongs.

      Also, playing the moral reletivity card with the 1700’s is displaced too. Shooting your political opponents might have been acceptable at one time in this country, but so was slavery. We’ve advanced passed that, we’re better than that.

      Anyway. OT: This is a sad tragic incident touching the lives of many. And it’s unfortunate that it happened.

  7. youngsooner - Jan 10, 2011 at 2:17 AM

    Look how far you all have strayed from the most important point. Im just a young cat so I may be wrong but the only thing that matters is that a poor innocent girl was killed in a horrible tragedy.

    You should be ashamed of yourselves for turning this tragedy into a political finger pointing match, and trying to use it to push your own personal point of views, while putting blame on your “opponent”

    We are all Americans. There is no aisle and rather than putting blame on someone who doesnt think just like you; we should be coming together to make sure things like this never happen again.

    Then again, Im just a kid and dont know anything.

  8. yankeesfanlen - Jan 10, 2011 at 9:31 AM

    I will have to interject on Mayor Bloomberg’s behalf here and state that at least part of the problem with any mass murder, whether it be this dastardly event, or Columbine, or fast-food random shootings and drive bys, is the result of extremely lax gun control and a culture of violence in media that permeates the nation’s society.Who knows if an X-box game sent this nutjob over the top- and somehow a pistol, used for nothing other than personal injury, was readily and legally available to him.
    Divisive rhetoric comes from misplaced priorities and expediencies to ram opinions down everyone’s throat with reason be damned.

    • Old Gator - Jan 10, 2011 at 11:36 AM

      Len, you’re right on target.

      Er…I mean…

  9. Old Gator - Jan 10, 2011 at 11:33 AM

    Johnny 5: and I love you too man (sniff). But to call this kid a “liberal” when his mistrust of a sitting supposedly liberal government drove his paranoia seems a little far fetched too. I’ll repeat: nowhere in any of my posts have I identified this lunatic as being meaningfully inclined in any particular ideological direction. My point was, and remains, that the atmosphere of political violence within which he, and the rest of us, are forced to live is largely of right-wing construction, especially when it comes to the particulars of partisan rhetoric. Liberals don’t go around insinuating that they’ll take up arms if the vote doesn’t go their way. Right wing candidates and talk show hosts routinely do. Liberals don’t view firearms as an answer to social problems. Right wingers do. Liberals don’t run PAC ads using sharpshooting or gunsights as metaphors for electoral decisions. Right wingers do. I stop here only because I am paranoid about the right-wing auto-refresh feature of WordPress. Or something like that.

    Incidentally, from what I’ve been reading the kid’s father especially sounds like the daddy of all pinwheels – shouting at neighbors who were putting out their trash that their garbage smelled bad, things like that. Sounds a lot like the family of Eric Harris, one of the Columbine shooters; his parents were another couple of certifiables. I recall that the elder Harris sued the school district after the massacre on some crackpot pretext or other. Can’t be long before daddy sues the city of Tucson for staging a meeting that provoked his psychotic son.

    I also recall that in The Boys from Brazil Josef Mengele sought out families who fit the same sort of profile – cranky, obnoxious, irascible parents just like Hitler’s, with whom he could plant his little cloned Hitlers in the hope that they’d grow up just like their donor. I mention this not so much for aesthetic effect as to re-emphasize that, whether Loughner was psychotic or not, that psychosis has an environmental component. Except in the most severe cases, or in cases of brain trauma, most psychoses of varying degrees involve a lot of environment interaction. Whatever its genetic predetermination, life in a household like Loughner’s, as well as in a cyberspace swimming with ideological posturing and hostility, probably nurtured his madness as much as any neurotransmitter imbalance or structural neurological deformity might have. And, I repeat: most of that hostility and paranoia is of right-wing manufacture.

  10. Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 11:51 AM

    ” Liberals don’t run PAC ads using sharpshooting or gunsights as metaphors for electoral decisions.”
    Don’t bet on it Gator, just google “democrat ads with crosshairs”
    “Liberals don’t go around insinuating that they’ll take up arms if the vote doesn’t go their way.”
    Oh no? The Panthers actually threatened people at voting stations as I recall.

    Look Gator, You’re doing exactly what bigots do right now. Except you’re lumping people together by political affiliation instead of by skin. And you’ll always remember when the right wing enemy does it, not when your pinkies do it. I despise what you speak of as much as you do, and I also see it from both sides. Maybe it’s because they both make me equally sick?? dunno.

    No one is “to blame” besides this kid. Political ads don’t kill.

    • Old Gator - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:24 PM

      Coda: checked the Mitchell ad. Yes, stupid. But let’s get real here: the “crosshairs” were a metaphorical reference to the justice department probe of his adversary, not an appeal to “take him out” in even symbolic terms – a pretty far stretch from the violence-sublimated imagery of the Palin ad, especially when you know what a kick she gets out of killing things and how clearly she understands that she’s appealing to the same gun-happy constituency. Let’s line out apples up across from our apples, shall we?

  11. Old Gator - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:10 PM

    Yes they do, unless you think we’re all completely immune to all cultural input and influence. We’re not. Hitler didn’t draw crowds that were all psychos, nor does Ahmadinejad, nor did Khomeini, Mussolini or the parade organizers of the Red Guard. They were drawn by rhetoric and they didn’t have to be crazy to be drawn.

    And calling the Panthers “Democrats” is, don’t you think, a bit of a stretch? I mean, really, that’s pretty ridiculous. It’s also a long way from Glenn Beck sending out gangs of thugs across the entire country to try to disrupt Town Hall meetings on health care. Incidentally, did you happen to check the authenticity of any of those so-called “Democratic” ads? I don’t see any attributions on that link. Unsupported comments like “such ads are pretty common” are sucker lines, especially when we’re talking on one hand about fringe groups like the Panthers versus well-established mainstream stuff like Palin’s ad, signed by her own hand to boot.

    • Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:34 PM

      Here’s the Dems version of a target map Gator.

      That’s the only link I gave you. I just suggested you google something. I’m not digging things up to support any one side, I’m trying to knock people in the head a little when they try to blame this kind of action on poor political direction from one side. This kid may have targeted this woman because it was easy and she was what he saw as “government” or at least the easiest to access. Both parties are responsible for irresponsible behavior and i really don’t think either side is more innocent than the other. And this killing spree tells me it wasn’t politics related anyway. Or he would have only shot Gifford. And he would have made sure he did it right, instead of firing into a crowd of innocent people as he did, leaving Gifford to live another day. Wow, what a tough woman.

  12. Jonny 5 - Jan 10, 2011 at 12:45 PM

    “And calling the Panthers “Democrats” is, don’t you think, a bit of a stretch? I mean, really, that’s pretty ridiculous.”

    Absolutely it is very ridiculous. But no more than blaming “the right” for this guy’s actions is. See what i mean?

  13. Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 1:13 PM

    By the way, Craig, why are several places calling this a spree? Aren’t spree kinngs defined as moving to several locations?

    • Utley's Hair - Jan 10, 2011 at 1:34 PM

      Yikes…spelling fail: make kinngs read killings.

  14. youngsooner - Jan 10, 2011 at 11:55 PM

    If the Panthers arent democrats then what would you call them? I mean, intimidating rebuplican voters kinda makes it seem like theyre dems, cause we know indepedents arent that dedicated; or we could throw it back on race but nobody wants to touch that ugly subject.

    Lets face facts. You cant put a blame on either party in this matter. The fault falls on the idiot who cant watch a television broadcast without getting pissed, going to numerous walmarts, then shooting into a crowd of his own country men because he cant form any better arguement. If there is any fault its with our poor school systems.

    We have become a nation of people who can only find their identity by determining what they are not. Once we do that we can never find common ground with those who are not exactly like ourselves.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (3158)
  2. G. Stanton (2564)
  3. M. Teixeira (2485)
  4. H. Olivera (2406)
  5. Y. Cespedes (2387)
  1. J. Fernandez (2360)
  2. K. Medlen (2181)
  3. Y. Puig (2132)
  4. G. Perkins (2087)
  5. J. Eickhoff (2059)