View source for Talk:Jared Loughner

Hi, sorry if my edits were along the wrong lines. Advice for future contributions please? [[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 11:34, 10 January 2011 (EST)
:I also am confused why they were removed. I was homeschooled myself and am glad I was by my mother. Carlos

Response to both above:  everything in this entry should be limited to well-support facts, without any opinion.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:00, 10 January 2011 (EST)

OK, understood. But I thought that I referenced the leaked Dept. of Homeland Security report? (I know I referenced the Huffington Post - had to hold my nose while doing so!)[[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 12:06, 10 January 2011 (EST)

:That's an insufficient basis for making an allegation in an entry page about someone here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:35, 10 January 2011 (EST)
:OK, that's cool. As you can see, I'm pretty new here. I'll have another read through the Conservapedia Commandments. [[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 12:41, 10 January 2011 (EST)

== Liberal? ==

Why does everyone claim he is a hard core Liberal? Other books he likes include Ayn Rand's first novel We the People and Hitler's Mein Kampf. He also wants a return to the gold exchange, a Libertarian point of view and he even claimed in on--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:05, 10 January 2011 (EST)e of his video's "don't accept federalist laws".

Sign your name please. And also, if you look at [[Hitler]]'s entry here, you will see that Hitler founded the Nazi party on a largely ''socialist'' platform. [[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 11:56, 10 January 2011 (EST)
:Yes, it is well known Hitler had many liberal viewpoints himself. [[User:CarlosMartinez|CarlosMartinez]] 11:58, 10 January 2011 (EST)

:A lot of liberals don't accept federalist laws; a lot of liberals got to have that joint before breakfast; a lot of liberals fail to understand that their liberalism has its roots in [[Fascism]] and [[National Socialism]]; and I'm sure there's some liberals who want the return to the gold standard simply to get their hands on the taxes that go with it.  And there are some liberals - even those who come here - who are attempting to play down Loughner's liberalism to the point where he should be treated as just another victim of society.  The blame Bush/Palin game is going on right now, courtesy of the liberal left.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 11:59, 10 January 2011 (EST)

Karajou, modern liberalism does not have its foundations in Fascism and Nazism, that is a blatant lie with absolutely no logical evidence or merit, and you are only comparing an ideology you don't agree with to the most destructive, hateful and right wing ideology to grace the face of the planet. I never once attempted to downplay a murderer's ideology, I hope he rots in jail, but with the murder of a federal judge and a little girl he'll most likely be put to death. On the gold standard, the government won't just tax random gold, the money supply and value is based off that of gold. Libertarians love it because it takes power away from central and federal banks. -AdmiralDolphin
:Admiral, please open your mind and avoid [[liberal style]]. Yes it does and you can read all about it on Conservapedia. [[User:CarlosMartinez|CarlosMartinez]] 12:27, 10 January 2011 (EST)

I find it ironic how a conservative wants a liberal to open their mind. And "yes it does" is the most childish argument I’ve ever heard.
:You're wrong, "Admiral"; the connections between fascism and liberalism are documented in this site, and they will be increased.  It is you who needs to open your mind.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:49, 10 January 2011 (EST)


Ayn Rand and Mein Kampf are hardly liberal. The first is libertarian and the second fascist. But hey, this is conservapedia, so don't let the facts get in the middle of ideology. [[User:Philny|Philny]] 18:29, 10 January 2011 (EST)
:Nice dig Philny and Mein Kampf isn't liberal, it is....? --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:33, 10 January 2011 (EST)
::Since you didn't answer, Mein Kampf came from the head of the National '''Socialist''' German Workers Party. Not much separates liberals from socialists. But hey, you're just trolling so move on.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:05, 10 January 2011 (EST)
:::Because it has the word Socialist it is automatically so, just like the USSR were republics, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is really democratic,  and the Republic of the Union of Myanmar is a republic. -AdmiralDolphin
::::And the only evidence that Nazism is on the right is because your Comrade Stalin said so.  While you're blocked, go read ''Mein Kampf'' and prove to me that Mr. Carpet Muncher was not a socialist.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:19, 11 January 2011 (EST)

== article appears to have a mistake in it.  ==

Although I have not followed this story closely as I have been busy with other matters, the article does appear to have a mistake in it on a key point.  I will preface my commentary by saying that I do think that Loughner was probably an atheist, but again I have not followed this story closely.  Here is what I believe is probably the case with Loughner's military application and it comes from a Arizona source: 

"Loughner wrote that while he was at the Military Entrance Processing Station in Phoenix, where military applicants are screened for eligibility, he was given a "mini Bible" before being tested.

"I didn't write a belief on my Army application and the recruiter wrote on the application: None," Loughner wrote.[http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/01/09/20110109jared-lee-loughner-gabrielle-giffords-arizona-shooting.html]  

Since there are wars on and recruiters are under pressure to gain recruits and not interested having candidates write an attached essay as far as their worldview beliefs, I think this account is certainly plausible. Loughner does appear to be the type of person who would leave blank information on a application form rather than filling out an application fully.[[User:Conservative|conservative]] 23:15, 12 January 2011 (EST)

: Not sure what you're saying the mistake is ...?

CP says in the footnote: "AP story Also, in an application for the U.S. Army, Loughner said he had no religious beliefs."

Although Loughner did not appear to take issue with what the recruiter wrote, at the same time, I can see a young person not wanting to confront an Army recruiter. Technically speaking though, Loughner left the religion box of the application blank and you have to infer that Loughner's silence concerning what the recruiter wrote is a consent to the accuracy of the recruiter's information for that part of the application - namely, what the recruiter wrote in the religion part of the application. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 23:49, 12 January 2011 (EST)
::::Of course, Lougher's statement relating to life having no meaning would be a very significant piece of evidence that would point to him being an atheist. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 23:52, 12 January 2011 (EST)

:::::One friend described Loughner as an "ardent atheist," and I doubt any nihilists believe in God!  But I agree that the Army application may not always perfectly capture an applicant's belief system.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:44, 13 January 2011 (EST)

== Contradictory article ==
There are several problems here. While it is very well-established that Loughner was a nihilist as well as a pothead, I don't think we can go so far as to call him "left-wing," nor can we derive anything terribly substantial from his publicly listed favorite books. User Jpatt brings up a good point; while the ''Communist Manifesto'' and ''Mein Kampf'' both espouse statist ideologies, atheist Ayn Rand's critically-acclaimed work ''We the Living'' is a clear diatribe against communism and state-run economies, a stark contrast to the prior two books. Personally I find it highly unlikely that a stoner like Loughner actually read any of these works or even understood the ideas they contain, and instead took delight in listing them purely for their high shock value, probably prescient of the fact that after the shooting his every published word would be studied and scrutinized.

This being said, I am able to provide several reliable sources that attest to Loughner's anti-government leanings which I think will clearly occlude any consideration of him as "liberal" or "left-wing."  Those close to him all agree on his unhealthy obsession with the oppression of the government and his propensity to rant against it:

* [http://radio.foxnews.com/2011/01/13/loughner-ex-girlfriend-says-he%E2%80%99s-faking-insanity-often-ranted-about-%E2%80%9Cthe-government%E2%80%9D/ FOX NEWS Radio: Loughner ex-girlfriend says he's faking insanity; often ranted about "the Government"]
* [http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/09/arizona-suspected-gunman-no-stranger-to-trouble/ FOX NEWS: "Loughner is suspected of posting a series of YouTube videos that show a focus on literacy and currency -- as well as his distrust in the government."]
* [http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/08/shooting-suspects-apparent-youtube-video/ Loughner: FOX NEWS: "I can't trust the current government because of the ratifications: the government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar. No! I won't pay debt with a currency that's not backed by gold and silver! No! I won't trust in god!"]
--[[User:Stirlatez|Stirlatez]] 17:24, 15 January 2011 (EST)