Coffman and Udall Butt Heads

6 thoughts on “Coffman and Udall Butt Heads”

1. have a right to be furious “he only represents Republicans”. When a friend called his office, that is exactly what they were told by a staffer.

   Log in to Reply

2. But I personally think that Coffman is a bigger butthead.

   Log in to Reply

   1. In hindsight, the title was a bit ambiguous, although not nearly as much as Coffman’s statement. Lesson learned? “Coffman and Udall Clash.”  or “Coffman Misses Opportunity to Sing Kumbaya with Udall”  

      Log in to Reply

3. … I think the American people over the last couple years have the right to be upset over what has gone on.”

   So Jared Loughner had a right to be upset? I used to have a modicum of respect for Mike Coffman. Gone.

   Log in to Reply

   1. with a bullet (don’t know if that pun is intended or not) on this week’s GOP talking-points hit parade . . .

      LB’s been singing that tune around here for days.

      Log in to Reply

   2. ……..what Coffman is saying, is that “sociopathic killers” don’t have the right to get upset because, we the tax payers, take such good care of the mentally ill and it is mandated that they, under no circumstances, are to listen to right wing talk radio, watch Faux News or heaven forbid, “Countdown with Keith Olbermann.”  TV’s and Radios for the mentally ill, what’s next?  Three hots and a cot?  

      Right wing media is only for those mature and stable who can call in and talk rationally about solutions. I mean, what is call screening for?  Just about every killing spree committed, whether perpetrated by “liberals” or “conservatives” those persons are seriously mentally ill. e.g. Timothy McVeigh. (He thought he had a bug (tracking device) up his ass)  Mental illness is the big problem and not so much the firearms, how are you going to keep firearms out of the hands of 57 million Americans?  Don’t think that mental illness is a huge problem?

      Mental Disorders in America

      Mental disorders are common in the United States and internationally. An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older -about one in four adults suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year.1 When applied to the 2004 U.S. Census residential population estimate for ages 18 and older, this figure translates to 57.7 million people.”

      Source:
      
      http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health…

      To be sure, not every person in society has a desire to commit murder. Murderous impulses occur only to a very small percentage of the population, to those who are sufficiently jealous, angry, drunk, drugged, insane, irrational, pathological, self-destructive or deceived enough to seriously contemplate killing someone. Some people may be only temporarily afflicted; others much more permanently. The more permanently ones we see as repeat offenders in our criminal justice system. How many people entertain an urge to kill in society varies; perhaps one country sees only 0.5 percent of its population in this state of mind over the course of a year, while another country sees only .001 percent. The difference can be attributed to social factors, like the availability of mental health treatment, substance-abuse programs, family counseling, poverty, media violence, racial tensions and hostilities, or any of countless other imaginable factors that contribute to the murderous impulse.

      Some social factors appear to have enormous impact on violent crime. Two social factors in particular have been getting increased attention from researchers lately; the first is media violence. Many sociologists do not consider it an accident that the crime wave that hit America in the 60s and 70s coincided with the first television generation coming of age. Dr. Brandon Centerwall has produced one of the most famous studies, which found that the mere introduction of television into a region causes its crime rate to double as soon as the first television generation comes of age. (1) In a 22-year study of 800 children from grade 2 to early adulthood, Leonard Eron and Rowell Huesmann found that the best predictor of later aggression was a heavy childhood diet of TV violence — more so than poverty, grades, a single parent in the home or exposure to real violence. (2)

      The second is income inequality. Although absolute poverty levels do not correlate too significantly with the crime rate, income inequality does (oddly enough). Two separate studies, one from Harvard, the other from Berkeley, compared state crime rates to their income inequality rates, and found that the states with the most inequality had the highest rates of homicide, violent crime and incarceration. This correlation holds internationally as well; Europe has much lower levels of inequality than the U.S., and much lower violent crime rates as well. In the U.S., the rising murder rate has accompanied a rising level of income inequality. In 1968, the Gini index of income inequality was a record low .348; by 1994, it had risen to .426, the highest level since the Great Depression.

      Source:
      
      http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/…  

      Log in to Reply