When did the shooter become a Tea Party member? The last I read he was a leftist. I'm not a Tea Party or Palin supporter by the way. I believe the truth is, both sides are guilty of fanning the flames.

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photography-printer-s-marks-image5929762

Printer's marks... Yeah....that's the ticket!

I don't think anyone is asking Sarah Palin to take responsibility for the shooting.
Most Americans ARE wondering when she will ever take responsibility for herself, instead of blaming her imaginary foes.

This author fails to reveal the shooter's obsession with congresswoman Giffords since 2007 which is long before the emergence of Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. Palin is wise not to respond to any attempts to connect her to the shootings. Author and leftists are now learning that the shooter is an insane doper and in a sense on of their own.

the left consists of highly educated commentators spewing stupid, inch deep, crap like this and Krugmans. the right consists of slightly less educated commentators spewing even less intelligent nonsense. the sad part is the leftwing drivel is eagerly soaked up by people with enough intelligence to know better.

I think it is not inappropriate to point out that many influential public figures are openly becking, i.e. saying that Obama's presidency is illegitimate, health care reform is tyranny, and citizens' proper response to tyranny is to use guns to resist the government.

For example these comments on a radio show from Sharron Angle, as reprinted in the "Insurrectionism Timeline":

"You know, our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. And in fact Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take [U.S. Senator from Nevada] Harry Reid out"

http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/guns-democracy-and-freedom/insurrection-timeline

Here we go, the leftist media machine is trying to build up RAGE against Sarah Palin and the Tea Party!

Well, I suppose that had Jon Kyl's granddaughter been killed he'd be casting around for a reason and a scapegoat too, and might even accept statements that according to today's Seattle Times were aired on Fox News: the child's mother saying that ". . . there's been a lot of hatred going and it needs to stop." And if Palin had the depth of soul that requires regular self-reflection, she'd be on a silent spiritual retreat and not shamelessly promoting herself in front every camera bewteen Washington and Wasilla. At any rate, I believe that were Palin to acknowledge any culpability, she would be greeted with the same scorn from liberals that met Lee Atwater's end-of-life contrition. To expect it of her seems a weird sort of revenge fantasy: she'll finally eat crow and admit she was wrong and wouldn't that make those of us who really dislike her feel we'd finally beaten her and her kind, until the people who really believe in her excommunicate her for her capitulation and elevate someone else to her position. I hope to God somebody learns something from this, but I'm not sure it will be Sarah Palin.

Thanks, Reverend, for a solid take on the issue, especially the distinction between being legally responsible and morally implicated, which describes too many now who react with derision and hate to anything and anyone they disagree with. Adding violent imagery and language raises the moral stakes. It's also the case that the insane are not irrational. Naveed Haq acted rationally for someone who wanted to commit an irrational act. Jared Loughner acted rationally for someone who wanted to assassinate a Congresswoman. Each rationally planned and carried out a heinous act. And they both did this in a social context, not just the personal context of their own minds, not just as completely isolated "whackos." Haq operated in the context of anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic fundamentalist jihad that thinks every Jewish Federation is the source of the problem and therefore should be attacked; Loughner operated in a context of a ranting fundmentalist faction that thinks losing a policy debate over health care or economic recovery or immigration is an apocalyptic end to freedom as we know it. It is not the content of what Loughner believes, however, but the context in which he believes it to be defendable by violence. Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, Angle, Kelly, and others through their gun-inspired rhetoric are the cheerleaders of that ideology and they are morally implicated in creating the context of hatred and derision that for some becomes a prelude to violence.

I noticed two comments on the news ticker today, both from conservative sources, decrying the politicization of this event. Overpoliticization has been the norm for years now. Whenever a geopolitical flareup occurs somewhere in the world, or a bit of economic news comes out, the pundits are all ready to go with their analyses--usually transparently self-serving--of how the event will affect the parties in the next election.

This irresponsible rhetoric about the Second Amendment, resisting tyranny, etc. is also not new. There has long been a hateful, violent element of the far right, which in 1995 became the source of the most severe terrorist attack in the United States up to that time. The event permanently discredited the militia movement in the eyes of the public, but the vitriol has only continued to grow.

What would be most appropriate for politicians such as John Kyl and Sarah Palin to do at a time like this would simply to offer their condolences to the families of the dead and injured and not worrying about covering their asses.

Another pathetic person twisting a tragedy for their own platform. Stop pointing fingers. Spend some more time praying.

He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.

It’s fascinating that crosscut.com has two pictures of the same person in two articles so close in proximity on their page, yet differing hairstyles and hair color. That aside, what’s tragic is that some folks condone the actions of a warped mind, one writing something to the effect that Democrats can get out one way (voluntarily) or the other. This is sad…and scary.

Typical liberal speak, why does there have to be someone to blame when someone like this whack job does something? Odd that few if any bleeding hearts ask, like where were his parents? He lived at home....there always is someone to blame except the person involved directly. Jimmy flunks out of school, must be the parents fault, Janie gets "knocked up", must be virgin birth.....and on and on...maybe it's time for something resembling personal responsibility.

"to avoid any responsibility, is really shameful.... they are morally implicated"

Sad to see a Reverend spewing so much hatred. And he fails to mention the Daily Kos also targeted Giffords angrily, and the DNCC used bullseyes on their campaign map against Republicans.

To be clear: if you're using this event to criticize the "rhetoric" of Mrs. Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you're either: (a) asserting a connection between the "rhetoric" and the shooting, which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b) you're not, in which case you're just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. Which is it?

P.S. by these same arguments, weren't Democrats morally implicated in John Hinckley's shooting of Reagan?

Anyone who lived through that era knows the rhetoric was certainly virulent at the time, Reagan was accused of hatred, racism and everything short of clubbing baby seals.

David Berkowitz "Son of Sam" killed people in New York because his dog told him to do it.

Blaming Sarah Palin for the Tuscon shooting is like blaming the dog for Son of Sam.