Rotten Roots Grow Up A Rotten Tree

First, please pardon my bad English and grammar. Then please understand that this may not be the right answer because even the professionals are in debate, what make me so great to be right, right?

Why/what made Jared Loughner do it? Simply because he follows his ideal “dreams”… and there are many complicated things that lead to this “dreams.” Even though many professionals point at his videos as evidence for his insanity (not in one’s right mind), the contents of his videos prove to me that Jared is totally in HIS right mind.

It took me about 15 minutes just to understand ONE video he posted (and he posted five!). As I watch the text-only videos posted by Jared Lee Loughner, I wonder whether it is because English is my second language or Jared is illiterate that I don’t really understand whatever he wrote. Now that I understand (doesn’t mean that I also idealize) his “dreams” that he revealed in his videos, Jared becomes a completely sane person to me. Jared states, “My favorite activity is conscience (moral) dreaming,” which shows that he believes he is doing a favor to us, the “illiterate/non-dreamer people.” The Daily Beast reported, “Potok thinks he (Jared) might mean “conscious dreaming,” (instead of “CONSCIENCE dreaming”) an idea particularly perpetrated by a British writer David Icke. “The link to Icke, who is an extremist, might be weak, but the basic idea of conscious dreaming is impossible to understand but boils down to: what we think is reality really isn’t. We live in a holographic universe,” which clearly explain Jared’s philosophy of “what we learned might not be the truth.” From the NYTimes, a report from Ms. Castle shows that Jared is interested in “lucid dreaming,” which is when the dreamer becomes aware that he/she is dreaming and able to control those dreams. But why is he obsessed with the dreaming things though? I am obsessed with dreaming, too (Please! Not to that extend!), because what I dreamed is what I can’t get in real life or it is too broad a goal that I’m not able to reach yet. Does this mean that Jared also dreams because he can’t get what he wants or that his dream is too broad? Anyone remember about how he wrote about the new currency? He stated, “If I’m possessing 10,000 new coins, and add 1 new coin to the new money system then my treasury is 10,001 new coins. My treasury isn’t 10,001 new coins. Thus, I’m possessing 10,000 new coins, and didn’t add 1 new coin to the new money system,” as I understand it, his new currency is only belong to him and no one is using it yet, like how dreams/goals are not reached and ideas are being ignored. When you are ignored, what do you do? What do you think others might do? Try to make yourself appealing to attract attention, right?

According to Ranke, history zooms in and out on “famous” people and WE study those “history.” If Jared wants people to notice his “dreams,” there is nothing better than making a fuss to attract attention. At this point, he has achieved part of his goal. Others may point at his family problem where his father doesn’t show any affection to him. That’s maybe right, but then if he wants his father’s attention, why not shooting his mother (Not that I said he should!) because he just need a person to shoot at to cause attention. Which only point me at the other direction, politic. The thing is who to shoot when it is politic, a police officer will be completely fine because a police officer is a part of the government too, why Gabrielle Gifford? Before I prove this, I should recall another part of his videos. He keeps saying that Pima Community College is a scam. NYTimes reports that when he is dropped out of high school, he said, “I realize now that this is all a scam.” When he volunteered, he was told not to come back until he “could follow rules.” When he receives a B for his grade and late assignments, he demands his rights according to the Constitution. His father doesn't acknowledge him/his existence. Now come back to his videos, his word “government” suddenly seems like just any authority to me. Schools are “government” to Jared as well, because schools “control” and teach or “brainwashing” grammar! (Government control more than that!) In 2007, the first meeting with Gabrielle Gifford, Jared’s ideas are completely ignored by her. Now she suddenly becomes a good choice of “a person to shoot at.” Now that he shoots someone with authority, soon people will start to read his works and acknowledge his ideal “dreams.”

Much like Beck, Jared also asks us “his listeners” to “read between the lines and infer things that he does not say aloud.” Beck also mentions how fascism and communism are two schools of thought and that they are not much different than each other. No wonder why “The Communist Manifesto” is in his favorite reading list. It rather introduces a new way of thinking to him. Rather than saying Jared has a mental illness, he thinks more alike Beck, both want to set themselves as the first examples for others to acknowledge and follow their ideal “dreams”. In Jared’s case, it’s a little more like “rotten roots grow up a rotten tree” (an idiom in my country which means Jared has problem from his family and it branches out even more into society).

Jared Lee Loughner

From watching Loughner’s youtube videos, it seems as though he eventually got to the point that he did because of negative experiences in his life with authority, namely being kicked out of college. Because of his numerous run-ins with police on campus for “strange behavior”, he made a video claiming that the college was unconstitutional, and that the actions of the administration were illegal. He also was not accepted into the army, probably for marijuana use. However, people get kicked out of school or barred from the military all the time and they don’t go out and try to kill their congresspeople. There must have been something else going on, particularly in terms of mental health. According to news sources, his personality changed exponentially in the past year or so. However, I think it is a bit unfair of the media to brand him as a crazy person, as someone who is mentally ill. There are plenty of mentally ill people who do not go on shooting sprees. I think that politics played a large role in his actions, despite what the media keeps saying. His online political rants and conspiracy theories, which he has been known to buy into, are not different from many opinions held by the far right. In particular he is concerned with grammar structure as government mind control, and issues with our currency and how it is not backed by gold. The arguments about the gold standard go back to the 1800’s, but in our day and age it is looked at as more of a fringe issue. I also found it interesting how his videos were laid out as logical arguments, all of which were valid points in terms of the rules of logic. However, most people would say that many of his arguments weren’t true to begin with. Nevertheless, with the help of the internet, Loughner has spread his message in unbelievable numbers. The five videos uploaded to his youtube account have together received around 5 million hits. Regardless of how incoherent they may seem, we are still watching them. If one of Loughner’s goals was to bring these issues to the forefront of national politics, it worked, and in ways that Sam Byck never could have done because of technological advances. But based on what I have watched and read, it seems like it was a mix of unfortunate personal circumstances, emotional issues, and increasingly extreme political beliefs that contributed to actions on Janurary 8^th, much like Byck (at least according to Clarke). I think it would be wrong to place all of the blame on only one of these factors.

primary source: http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10#p/u/0/7uRjwPWaxiY

secondary sources: http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2011/01/10/jared_loughner_and_the_gold_standard/index.html

and

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/10/jared-lee-loughner-arizona-shooting

Another article that I enjoyed reading, but didn't really use in this post: http://www.slate.com/id/2281133/

Is why the real question?

I understand that this assignment is to write about why we believe Loughner committed the crime in Arizona or to try and find what made him do it, but honestly, no one will ever completely understand why he did this or what drove him to the final stages in his thought process prior to the attack. We will never be in his head or come to an understanding about the way that his twisted mind worked. There have been many news articles and blogs written that state Loughner was a mentally ill man who exhibited schizophrenic behaviors, it is difficult enough for the average human being to read another human beings mind but then to throw in that his mind may have had a different chemical balance than most human beings makes it almost impossible to truly understand why. I have been on his youtube site and read his bios as well as watched several videos. In my opinion what I viewed was difficult to follow due to his way of wording his thoughts and ideas and at times confusing. There has been a correlation to these writings and grammar drawn to David Wynn Miller, a far right activist who believes in using "truth language" when writing to throw off the government that watches us 24/7. However, what I did understand from it I found to be mesmerizing. This man was living in the same time as me and I was completely unaware of his existence until he committed a crime that left him in infamy to all of America. It is clear that his mind and thoughts and his self proclaimed "conscious dreams" were complex and bizzare and although other people were aware of these habits and behaviors there was never something that indicated he be looked at or kept a closer eye on before it was too late. In a 60 minutes episode that aired on Sunday January 16,2011 former Mayor Giuliani was interviewed on what his opinions were on Loughner and he said that the real problem here is our country's lack of priority and recognition of the mentally ill. He claims that there is too little being done for people who are mentally ill and for possibly protecting our nation and the individual themselves from their disease. It is taboo in this country to talk about mental illness or to suggest certain measures that need to happen with all people affected with such disorders. Many things in the past may have been prevented if such measures were taken and many instances in the future could be prevented in his opinion.

The mental illness card has also been played in different articles and interviews that try to investigate the thoughts and process behind murder. Bill O'Reilly was cited in a Milbank article as

saying that nobody will hurt another human being unless they are mentally ill. I do not agree with this statement completely and do whole heartedly believe in the concept of the possibility of a gray area in every category and situation but he is not the only person who thinks this way or who recognizes the correlation to mental illness in certain crimes. If this is being put out there why aren't preventative measures being the next step that we as a whole are taking. It is a serious topic and a sensitive one but we need to get over our tiptoe attitude and accomplish some things in our society or at least start trying.

Why did he do it?

Jared Loughner was without a question mentally unstable. As I browsed the internet, I came across many articles saying that he was schizophrenic. On his YouTube video, he stated that “my favorite activity is conscience dreaming; the greatest inspiration for my political business information. Some of you don’t dream- sadly.” His dream was to have a different world. He doesn’t believe in the way the world is run. He also stated that “life had no meaning and the world had no substance.” He thinks everyone is unconstitutional. So therefore, he doesn’t agree with Congresswomen Giffords, or for anyone in politics for that matter. In 2007, he attended one of her rallies in Tucson, Arizona. He felt neglected by her when she failed to answer his question. I believe that this was a major factor in his decision to kill her and his feeling of dislike towards her.
I strongly believe that most people who commit such terrible crimes have been previously influenced by their social life and have feelings of neglect. A cite I read explained that Loughner was a case of high school abuse. Friends say they noticed a deterioration that steadily became worse and worse. This deterioration leads to an impact within his life. He learned to blame others for his problems and then found a way to make up for his feeling. This triggered a violent action.
Throughout his life he has been indirectly influenced by people around him. Starting in his earlier life he was neglected by his peers and turned to drugs. In his recent years he was influenced by the news, politics, religion, and much more. As I stated above, he believe the world is unconstitutional and things should be changed. This related to the article on Glen Beck. They both believe that the world should be changed and something radical should be done. This mind set resulted in the death of innocent people.

Kate Lyall

Accepted Ambivalence

It may be difficult for why sources have not come to a concrete agreement as to WHY exactly Jared Lee Loughner acted upon his malicious intentions to kill Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords plainly because...

there are a plethora of possibilities.

How could the human mind in all its complexity act so drastically with but one mere reason? All of the sources that have attempted to draw conclusions as to what drove Loughner to acting on his plan provide several valid arguments. Some claim that he is clinically insane while others believe he was acting on political extremism. Dr. Daniel Carlat, Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine, is one of many who believe that Loughner's behaviors over the past few years were closely fitting to the pattern of schizophrenia. At age 22, Loughner was at the same age of the typical age onset of the disorder. Furthermore, one of the most common symptoms seen in schizophrenic patients is that one becomes incoherent and delusional. Loughner emphasized in his personal youtube videos that the government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar. If that’s not delusional, I’m not sure what is.

In one of his youtube videos, Loughner stresses the importance of being literate, and claims that the majority of people who reside in District 8 are illiterate, which he finds hilarious. However, in the same video, Loughner makes a statement that is clearly grammatically incorrect: “If I have my civil rights, then this message wouldn’t have happen.” Either he made a boo boo in his typing, or he has no idea what the hell he’s talking about. Regardless, his argument is invalid. This makes me believe that rather than seriously feeling as though the corrupt government acts on its twisted grammatical brainwashing, Loughner is simply suffering from mental instability, and the outcome of his behavior is truly tragic- on both ends.

Upon viewing various sources of input, the way that Loughner is primarily framed is that of a crazy person. However, in an article in the New York Times, Clarke presents a different argument. Throughout his years of research, he claims to have identified four types of perpetrators in assassinations; he groups Loughner into the category of Reagan’s attacker and Wallace’s would-be assassin. He believes that Loughner will view his victims as trophies, which I think is an unfair generalization to make. Perhaps with his years of assassinator-research, he has valid claims, but I still think that Clarke is being ignorant of the various other possibilities as to why Loughner acted the way that he did. Every human deserves the respect to be analyzed correctly as his or her own person, not just labeled as some sort of monster, no matter how inhumane their deeds. Clarke’s, along with the rest of the world’s, incapability of being objective serve to complicate matters moreso because quite frankly, who are we to judge, mock, and/or scorn the actions of others when we evidently have no idea WHY people, Loughner particularly, are driven to do what they do? It is unfair. And, I am guilty of it as well. The thing is, I will never truly know WHY Loughner decided to shoot at those people that day… but maybe Loughner doesn’t either.

The milk man made me do it.

What I find most interesting about looking into the story of
Jared Lee Loughner is all of the people who are bound and determined
to explain to everyone how it was someone else's fault. This is the
case with a lot of murders like this. They did it for political
reasons, they were mentally unstable, they were a victim of abuse,
they had a rough childhood; their mother never loved them enough,
their mother loved them too much... the list goes on and on. I by no
means feel that I have the right to state why what happened
did actually happen. I am not a doctor, a psychic and I have certainly
not been inside Loughner's mind to see what he saw, so, I have no idea
why he committed this horrendous crime. But, I am
enjoying listening to all the people who do claim to know.
I believe my first favorite would have to be a blog I found
describing how Loughner was being used as a tool of the government.
In fact she claims that, like many others was, "one of the many who
were psychiatric set up, implanted, e-shocked, drugged,
mind-controlled and hypnotized..." This of course was done by the
"psychiatric mafia" who are turning people into killing machines in
order to, "force Congress and judges to make psychiatric treatment
mandatory." Sounds plausible right? But hey, I certainly have no
more insight then this person might, so for all I know, I should
really stop letting my shrink hypnotize me.
Of course there are many other that rely on what has now becoming
a standard in blame when it comes to young adults committing murder.
The almighty and ever powerful media. We can all recite the words
that places the blame: The internet is to blame. Children can search
and find anything and most of what they find is violence! Video games
are to blame. With games like Call of Duty and Modern Warfare its a
wonder murders aren't being committed like this everyday! Television
is to blame. I can barely turn on my TV anymore without finding all
kinds of violence for everyone to see and Glen Beck is telling me
everyone I need to kill! No matter where in the media the blame is
placed, it's still pretty hard to prove. Yes it can be a large
contributor to violent acts that are committed, but, are we really
ready to place sole blame for someone actions onto something they saw
or played? I for one am certainly not.
As for other opinions on why Loughner committed this heinous
crime, I am very interested in how many people look to his appearance
for answers. His now "famous" mug shot in which he is "creepily"
smiling has been all over the news and it seems has made him all the
more guilty of committing this crime. And of course, it has made him
guilty of having no remorse for his crime, the ultimate social sin.
As perfectly described by the New York Times, "Does the grin convey a
sense of accomplishment, or complete disengagement from the
consequence of his actions?" In my opinion, we may never know, but it
sure is interesting to look at everyone's guesses.
Finally, before I ramble on for another 10 pages, my own thoughts on
the issue. He is guilty, plain and simple. Yes there may be
underlying causes, yes he may have reasoning and yes there will always
be potential to blame someone or something else, but, facts are facts.
As so bluntly put by Ranke, "Strict presentation of facts, no matter
how conditional and unattractive they may be, is undoubtedly the
supreme law." He obtained the weapon, pointed the gun, pulled the
trigger and people died. Clear and simple. Those are the facts and
everything else is opinion.

Nothing made him do it. He's crazy.

I am unable to understand why anyone would do such an act such as taking a life. There is absolute no reason for this act other than being crazy. Jared Lee Loughner was definitely crazy. The thing I found that was most interesting/ frightening was Loughner's youtube channel. He states that his "favorite activity is conscience dreaming; the greatest inspiration for my political business information." He has this mind set that his views of politics and the world are the right ones and since "Some of you don't dream- sadly." Other people do not share his same views and don't think of the world the same way in which he does. When reading the article from The Daily Beast about Loughner's mental illness says "He would make a comment about someone's poem and none of us would know what he was talking about." Jared Loughner sounds as if he was an outsider and in his mind he created that he was one of the 5% that day dreams. He believes he is right while the rest of the society is wrong.

The photo that they show after Loughner is arrested he is smiling and looking very enthusiastic. He looks pleased with his actions and himself. His facial expression signifies that he has no remorse for his actions. That he believes he did "good". The investigators found an envelope in Loughner's house that said "I planned ahead" and "My assassinations" He also had a thank you letter from Giffords for attending an event in 2007. And although it has been reported that he planned the attack which he certainly did msnbc.com reported that the ammunition was pruchased hours before; which is interesting that Loughner would wait hours before his plan to buy the ammunition.

Jared Lee Loughner related closely to Clarke's article about Samuel Joseph Byck. Byck wanted to make his life mean something even if it meant the horrific event of his killing on the plane right before his death. Loughner believed he could make a difference from his murders. After viewing his youtube channel I saw that Loughner believed he was doing something that would better the world since he is one of the "few daydreamers". Just as Byck had a bad relationship with his family, wife, and could not keep a job, Loughner was an outsider from other students in his class. He was isolated and dropped out of school. After Loughner tried to enlist in the army he was denied after a drug test reported by CNN.

There is no way of truly knowing why Loughner did what he did. However, just like Byck it is a mindset of that they believe they need to do. This mindset came from their relationships and their inability of achieving their goals and life aspirations. They feel like they need to make themselves memorable and this is the way they chose to go.

Why?

Try as I might, I haven’t been able to come up with a clear-cut reason why I think Loughner did what he did. It is clear to me that he is very mentally unstable and ill. Beyond that, Loughner seems to have some vague political ideals and rationales. His YouTube video, “How To: Mind Controller” ends with the sentence “I’m able to control every belief and religion by being the mind controller!” He seemed to think that the government was controlling people though grammar, and he wanted that to end. His vendetta against Giffords began when, in 2007, he asked her a question, “What is government if words have no meaning?” that she declined to answer. He later told a friend that “politicians don’t get it,” and seemed to be very upset that Giffords wouldn’t answer his question (ABC Nightline). On an ABC Nightline video, “Inside Jared Lee Loughner’s Mind,” a high school friend says that they used to talk politics, and that they wanted to change the government. But I think that his mental instability is more of the issue. Neighbors, friends, and teachers have come out and said that they noticed that he was an outsider, strange, and mentally unstable. But in Arizona, witness testimony of behavior is all that the government needs to force someone into a mental institution for observation (CBS video). So why didn’t any of these people speak up? Clarke, Loughner’s lawyer, is first going to try and say that Loughner is mentally unfit to stand trial, and if that does not work, go for the insanity plea, which could decrease his sentence from death to life in prison (CBS video “Tucson Suspect Loughner Insanity Plea?”). In the Milbank reading, Fox’s Bill O’Reilly says that “Nobody, even if their frustrated, is going to hurt another human being unless they’re mentally ill.” But that would mean that all murderers should go free on the insanity plea, which obviously is not the solution. So how do you tell if someone is really insane? And how do you know if they’re mentally unstable enough not to be held accountable for their actions? Loughner certainly seems to be mentally ill, but the solution is most definitely not that simple, and his reasons much more complicated.

Why did he do it? Dan dan daaan (dramatic music)

As I watched and read varied sources of and about Loughner I concluded that Loughner isn’t sane. He is mentally unstable and that instability is what drove him to the catastrophic shooting. He was very obsessive in his Youtube postings he emphasizes about conscience dreaming and how his favorite activity is “conscience dreaming” and the things he says doesn’t make any sense to me and I’m sure it doesn’t make sense to any normally functioning person. I feel as if he’s not in the real world he not in touch with reality. The crazier his thinking gets, the more he loses the focal point he’s making. Mind Control was another thing he kept going over. As he said “mind control is when you control someone’s belief and religion. You control every thought, action and lifestyle for the person or people as the mind controller“. He believed that he was able to control every belief and religion by the mind control.

There is obvious hatred towards the government that’s why he said “You don’t allow the government to control your grammar structure”. He believed the government was brainwashing people. But in a way he’s brainwashing people that perhaps are in the same state he’s in. As long as it isn’t the government then brainwashing is a good thing? That seems to be the message he’s portraying. That’s how you can see his instability. As Potok says in DailyBeast article ‘truth language’ is something that can throw off the government, and I do think Loughner took that aspect from Miller to somehow make sense to others. But Loughner himself is very delusional and all his rants make no sense whatsoever. The reason he tried to kill Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is because his illness and anger combination is what resulted to this event. He felt she was part of the people that didn’t allow him to have civil rights.

Looking over Clarke’s txts I see that both Byck and Loughner have issues deep issues that surfaced. They didn’t appear out of the blue, both had difficulties in their lives which unfortunately drove them to kill. Furthermore I also think the instability made both impulsive and not really think things through which shows the inability to rationalize with the act and how destructive it really is.

The fine line between genius and insanity...

From what I read, it seems somewhat clear as to why Loughner did what he did. A lot of it reminded me of the reading we did on Sam Byck. Like Byck, Loughner seems to have deep personal issues, and instead of dealing with them, he focused all of his anger and hate on an easy target: the government. Gabrielle Gifford, according to one social worker had it all: she was beautiful, had a great husband, the perfect job. Loughner had none of these. This made Gifford the ideal target for him: she had everything that he didn’t, so he took his anger out on her and everything that she represented.

I looked over a list of Loughner’s favorite books posted on his youtube channel. Not surprisingly, many of the titles were very anti-government and Big Brother-esque:Ken Kesey’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Huxley’s Brave New World, and Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Also fascinating was Hitler’s Mein Kampf, (My Struggle).

It is obvious that Loughner was influenced and truly began to believe the sentiments he read: the government is not to be trusted and it brainwashes its citizens. These exact ideas can be read on Loughner’s videos. This is reinforces how books and more specifically language, are powerful tools, and should not be taken lightly.

Although what he did was awful, it’s difficult to classify Jared Lee Loughner as an "insane individual". He is an extremely educated, (although misguided) individual. I looked at a few of his youtube videos, and noticed that many of his writings were in forms of mathematical/ philosophical theories. The fact that he is extremely bright is more disturbing than if he were just "insane". I think in general, we are too careless in labeling people. Writing Loughner off as a mere crazy person would provide an easy answer to his actions, that being that he is crazy, and his actions are unexplainable. But the fact that he was thinking very “logically” and came to believe his own twisted logic, is what is disturbing.

Reasons

Three things must first be stated about Jared Lee Loughner in order to understand why he did it: he is disturbed, he is contradictory, and he is organized. Those three things about him have meshed together to produce someone who believes himself to be the only sane person in a sea of brainwashed government followers. The reason that propelled Jared to kill 6 people and murder 13 more is simple: he had to prove to his "listeners" and to himself that he was sincere in his beliefs. His beliefs being that "I can't trust the current government because of the ratifications: the government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammer." So, how exactly do his beliefs about government control through grammar lead him to shoot so many innocent people? One of the victims that Jared shot happened to be Representative Gabrielle Giffords. In one of his videos he mentions "The majority of people, who reside in District-8, are illiterate..." Giffords is the representative for District 8. Also, in an ABC news video, one of his former girlfriends Ms. Figueroa says that he once met Giffords and asked her a question related to government and literacy. According to Ms. Figueroa he said that Giffords did not give him the right answer. Does that make him insane? Possibly. But consider a few things first before labeling him unsound of mind. According to the New York Times when Jared was arrested and placed into a cop car. He immediately pleaded the fifth. They also reported that before even going to the Safeway where he shot his victims, he bought a diaper bag to conceal his gun and ammo. He may have been in need of some mental help, but his youtube videos, planning, and actual actions show that he wanted to prove everyone and himself that he was willing to take a stand for his beliefs, and hopefully make a stand against what he considered to be the evil government.

Why did Loughner do it?

My first step in approaching this assignment is thinking about what it would be like to be in a persons' place who was thinking about killing someone. Would I be able to? What would it take for me to even consider such an atrocious act? In all the sources thus far, it seems as though the killers were suffering from some sort of emotional or mental disturbance that enabled them to rationalize and justify taking another persons' life. In the Milbank article, there is a discussion between Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly on what are necessary attributes of killers. Bill O'Reilly asserts that people only become killers when they are mentally unstable. While I am inclined to agree, Beck's rebuttal that people can snap mustn't be overlooked. While each case has its own, individual reasons why the killer snapped, I had another thought in mind while examining Loughner's specific case. The portion of the article about Loughner that discusses his drug usage (specifically LSD, psychedelic mushrooms, etc.) was of importance in this situation, I believe. I researched his background a bit, and found an article in the Pioneer Press that interviewed neighbors who had been near the Loughner's for years. One of them told the reporter that he saw Amy (Jared's mother) consistently buying cases of beer at the grocery store and were very private people. It also said that his father had not had an out of home job in some time. The beer alone would lead me to believe that someone in the household had a drinking problem, which can psychologically affect children on its own, without even adding in Jared's own alleged drug use. In the Journal of Health and Social Behavior, a study was done on LSD users. Interestingly enough, Jewish people between the ages of 18 and 22 had the highest proportions of LSD users. Also noted in the study was an interview were the parents of a friend of Loughners' who mentioned that he would go to their house several times a week and practice Tai Chi with their son. In the study in the Journal of Health and Social Behavior, it was also noted that a noticeable amount of LSD users practiced religion as Buddhists, which is a religion associated with Tai Chi. Later in the study, the author tells that LSD users are also generally switching between jobs and not students. I realize this is a lot of rambling about correlations between LSD and some features of Loughner, but I found it rather interesting how many connections there were between his personal life and the drug usage. The point of all of this information was to lead to this; the study later informs the reader that the psychological effects of LSD users include schizophrenia and psychopathic deviation, and that in most cases, a theme of disequilibrium in parent-child relationships (mostly stemming from parent pressure such as censuring, quarreling with, and punishing the child). Because of this evidence, I believe very strongly that he was unstable to begin with due to home life, and his drug usage pushed him into a state of psychosis in which he was unaware of what reality really is. It's hard to say, in the end, if he really was aware of what he was doing. On his YouTube channel, he posts; "If you're editing of every belief and religion reaches the final century then the writer for every belief and religion is you. You're editing of every belief and religion reaches the final century. Thus, the writer for every belief and religion is you. You control every -- thought, action, and lifestyle -- for the person or people as the mind controller. I'm able to control every belief and religion by being the mind controller." I suppose anything could be possible.

Ad Hominem

Why? I'll tell you why. Because he wanted to. Isn't that the reason we all do what we do?

My answer above doesn't seem to be 300 words, well maybe by Loughner's number scale it could be as he was noted by one of his college professors to have interrupted a class lecture by saying the number six could be called eighteen. Technically, I'd have to agree with him. (Is that bad?) Because it's true. Way back way if the people who named things decided to call a rose something else -- like, "testicle" then that is what we would know it as. Funny huh? "Awh my boyfriend bought me a dozen testicles for Valentines Day" Cute right? And I'm sure that they would indeed smell as sweet. So sure, technically, six could be called eighteen. And technically my 19 word answer, could be 300 words, depending.

But i'm off track, so since I doubt I can get away with my answer of 19 words. I'll go on.

I examined the videos on laughner's page and read the NY times article "Looking behind the mug-shot grin"

I wonder why Laughner was so obsessed with transitive relation. --For those of you who don't want to google it, or didn't take philosophy like I did last semester, transitive relation is the thought process of which: A causes B and B causes C thus, A causes C, right?

Example of this, at least from my understanding, (A) Jared Laughner went to Safeway, (B)He shot up the parking lot and (C) smiled when he was arrested. Soooo, Jared Laughner went to Safeway and smiled when he was arrested. What? that sounds crazy when you leave out the middle part. Hmmm.

It is interesting to me that all of his youtube ramblings were in this format or in some version of transitive relation. Knowing this makes the "rambling" not quite "rambling" but more of a some word that describes something a little more well-thought out phrases strung together. Confused? Maybe Laughner was actually a genius, which made him crazy because he couldn't handle his thought process. In the NY times article Mr Gutiernez was quoted saying "He had the most incredible thoughts but could not handle them" ----So maybe that's why he did it. He had the thought, and couldn't handle it so he acted without giving into rational thought.

The in-depth background given in the article kind of makes me sick. After what we discussed in the first class, about assassins becoming famous for what they did -- all I can think of with this article is, Here we go again. Anyone wanna bet when the first book about him will be released? I'm guessing within the next year becuase i'm sure some author is, for lack of a better phrase, jumping on that shit, to get a good payout.

Because history repeats itself, and everyone seems to love knowing every minuscule detail about a person who could commit a crime like this. Again, it makes me sick. As I read the article, I thought who cares if his favorite book is Peter Pan or that he drank a 24 oz can of Miller High Life occasionally.

The business woman in me does wonder if the sales of Miller High Life will increase due to this free advertisement. Think they'll send a Thank you card to Laughner if they do increase? Otherwise what was the point of mentioning the brand instead of just saying "beer" I can tell you. Because after the Tuscan shootings, people want to know all the stupid details of laughner's life down to the last time he went to the bathroom, in hopes to understand why a person could commit such a terrible crime. I could save them all the trouble. He didn't do it because he used to smoke pot, or because he dropped out of high school or because he showed up to high school drunk one morning. He did it, because he wanted to. That seems to be enough of an answer for me.

He definitely was weird though. His background will definitely satisfy everybody because people can call him crazy or insane. That makes them feel better about the situation because surely if Laughner would have been an outstanding citizen and "normal" among most people's definitions, would have made it a lot harder for people to rationalize the "why." To those people, I'd like to introduce them to the story of the "craigslist killer" Surely that one will be harder to rationalize.

Why Did He Do It??

It is impossible for me as a student to concretely explain exactly what was going through the mind of Jared Lee Loughner when he killed 6 people and injured 14 others. What made him decide this was what he should do? What is the story behind the shooter? These are all questions asked by Americans and citizens are looking desperately for the answer.

After researching the shooting more in depth and researching Loughner's past I came across scattered pieces of evidence that may have contributed to this awful tragedy. Signs of his troubled existence surfaced through multiple outlets. For an unknown reason Loughner dropped out of high school in his junior year. He tried joining the army but he was rejected. He was not in possession of a job. He was also arrested for drug possession. He funneled many of his opinions and thoughts through his myspace and youtube page. It was apparent through these posts that he harbored feelings of obsession with violence and paranoia about the government. One post in particular from his youtube page reads, "The government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar." He showed definite signs of opposition to the United States government. He met congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in 2007. An account from a friend from high school said that when Jared came back from meeting Giffords he told the friend what question he asked her which was the following, "What is government if words have no meaning?" Gabrielle did not have a sufficient response according to Loughner because he told his friend, "I can't believe she doesn't understand it. Politicians just don't get it." It was apparent that Loughner believed the politicians in the U.S. were clearly not going in the direction he wanted and as a result he became severely disturbed. All of these examples could have contributed to his shooting in January.

I watched a video on youtube titled, Nightline: Inside Jared Lee Loughner's Mind from abc.com. This video showed several clips ranging from his neighbors to former teachers. The video was trying to investigate and figure out why he did what he did. He grew up in Tuscon and many of his neighbors saw his family as troubled. One of the neighbors pointed out that when he and his children would go outside and play and would invite Jared he would never be allowed to. He would have to sit inside and watch them play. He had an isolated life and neighbors seemed uneasy around him. His friend from high school started to see him go crazy after he dropped out of high school. The video also touched on the fact that Loughner was a big fan of 'lucid dreaming'. Lucid dreaming is when a person has very clear and vivid dreams and they are aware that they are dreaming and are able to influence what happens in the dreams whether it be the plot or the outcome. He said in an internet video before the shooting that, "I can't trust the current government," and, "I'm a sleepwalker." The video showed Psychologist Dr. Alan Lipman stating that, "the key to understanding Loughner is looking at his disorganized, delusional, disruptive psychotic behavior." I watched another video from abc.com that showed Diane Sawyer interviewing Tuscon's sheriff. She asked him what brought Loughner to this shooting? The sheriff replied by placing part of the blame on the rhetoric of politicians today, specifically Rush Limbaugh. He believes Limbaugh is irresponsible because he uses partial information and sometimes wrong information and attacks people. The sheriff says he angers people against government and official which might be partly the cause for certain individuals to act in this severe manner.

I believe the sheriffs comments transitions into the article by Dana Milbank. In the article, Glenn Beck Is Not Responsible For Any Acts Of Violence Committed By His Viewers; He's Just An Entertainer, it covers a story about Richard Poplawski and how the influence of Glenn Beck led him to kill. The article touches on the same problem being that some people with the ability to influence millions of people are trying to initiate violent retaliation by stating extreme opinions and tentative plans of action. Beck is known to stir up controversial subjects all the time. He has labeled politician such as Obama and Pelosi as "dangerous." He is labeling the politicians as "dangerous" with an attempt to prompt his loyal followers and give them a reason to take action through violence. The article revealed that in April 2010, Greg Giusti verbally threatened Pelosi. Milbank states, "A crazy person watching Beck could have thought he was doing the world a favor by taking on this violent Nancy Pelosi." In the past Beck has proposed to poisoning, hitting/killing with a shovel, and shooting certain politicians. Beck is promoting and planting ideas for more violence against the government.

Grammatical Error

It's ironic that when we point to the evidence of Jared Lee Loughner's insanity, we point to his grammar.

Seriously. There's also the shooting, of course -- but a shooting could easily be the work of a sane person -- a politically motivated sane person, perhaps. Those floating, nonsensical words on his YouTube videos, on the other hand, convince us that Jared Lee Loughner is crazy.

It seems the most popular theory as to why Loughner 'did it' is what The Daily Beast calls a "toxic cocktail -- mental illness, mixed with angry political rhetoric". General consensus states that the radical right-wing conspiracy theories (such as government controlling the minds of the people through grammar) didn't help, but the real problem was simply that Jared Lee Loughner is insane. This is the safest and most plausible answer -- it rids everyone of blame and is more or less supported by the little evidence we have -- that is, the evidence from Jared himself, who is (according to Ranke) the most reliable and accurate source. For although the rhetoric on his YouTube videos is vaguely right-wing (I might say just plain radical) -- certainly anti-government -- and he did target Congresswoman Giffords, the dominant message is not one rooted in a coherent political ideology, with a clear political goal, but one centered around logical structures, an obsession with their workings and possible subversions thereof. What if we had new currency? What if we had new words? What if reality was dreams, and we could control our dreams? These are the questions Jared shows us. And according to his friend Bryce Tierney, interviewed by Mother Jones, his grudge against Giffords did not stem from her political agenda, but from her refusal to answer his question: "What's government if words don't have meaning?" Tierney says that "[e]ver since that event, he thought she was fake, he had something against her."

I am not interested in speculating why Jared Lee Loughner decided to shoot Gabrielle Giffords, and all those there to meet her. I don't see the value in it. What I am interested in is Loughner's determination to view the world as dream world, a world of symbols, or of illusion. In lucid dreaming (which is how many have interpreted Loughner's 'conscience dreaming'), one is aware of the dream state and can step in and change things as they want; they can engage as an active character in their own narrative. I see a parallel in this interactive narrative with Sam Byck, and how he attempted to engage with the world. [Enter grand theory:] Byck viewed Nixon as a symbol of all that oppressed him, but Nixon was beyond his reach. Although he felt profoundly affected by him, Nixon seemed to live in a separate world. For most Americans, I think, politicians feel more fictional than real; they are characters in a narrative we see unfolding daily. Byck tried to thrust himself into that narrative, to gain control -- or perhaps the collision itself was merely the point. This seems, to me, akin to Loughner's choice to turn reality itself into a dream, into something he could interact with. A place where, he told his friends, "I can create things and fly. I'm everything I'm not in this world." His desire to 'dream' a new world corresponds with his desire to coin new currency -- find new words, words inseparable from their meanings.

I don't know Jared Lee Loughner, and I don't know what went through his head. But I hope that we don't continue to write off 'mental disturbance' as something foreign, as a real reason anyone would do anything. Insanity isn't a reason; in fact, we pretend that it's the opposite.

Word Warcraft

A talented saxophonist. High school dropout. A paranoid schizophrenic. The suspect. These are all phrases used by the New York Times to describe Jared Lee Loughner, within the same article no less. He is a complex person. And no doubt his reason for the events that occurred January 15^th are no less complex.

On his YouTube page, Loughner’s videos deal with issues such as education, the importance of grammar, and government, especially ideas of needing a “new currency.” Full of confounding deductive logic, Loughner says things such as, “If I have my civil rights, then this message wouldn’t have happen” (ironically, note the bad grammar) and, “Every police officer in the Unites States as of now is unconstitutionally working.”

The New York Times described Loughner’s past in a similar way James W. Clarke spoke about Sam Byck. Aside from mental illness, the Times also includes the “real problems” Loughner had – estrangement with his father, drug problems and an interest in anti-government conspiracy theories.

Another YouTube video, from a channel called DTOM News, notes that on Loughner’s YouTube channel, Loughner describes himself in the past tense, because when “everyone found out who the shooter was, he would be dead.” Justin Faith, creator of DTOM news, believes that everything published to the YouTube profile was completely thought-out and intentionally published. In another video, Faith states that Loughner believes himself a “revolutionary hero” who is part of a “militia movement”, a “super patriot” like Timothy McVeigh believed himself to be.

If you’re getting that sense that Loughner sounds a lot like Byck and Oswald, you’re not alone. “One man’s terrorist is another man’s patriot,” Byck said.

One could easily say that Loughner is just a “lone nut,” that he’s totally mentally unstable and that’s why this happened. However, I think that’s only one part of issue. Plenty of people have mental disorders such as schizophrenia and do not end up trying to kill a congresswoman and murdering six other people. Loughner’s interest in politics is important here.

One could also (and probably rightly, in some ways) blame Glenn Beck for what has occurred. After the shooting, Beck spoke about the incident on his show. I was hoping for an inspiring talk about choosing words carefully. I was, of course, setting my expectations too high, and had my motivations all wrong. Though the video was called “Glenn issues a challenge to stand against violence,” Beck spent more time arguing about the rhetoric of the left and how they are the ones to be blamed than standing against conflict. I could go on and on about that, but it would only get me frustrated and utterly off-track. Instead, I’m going to focus on something that will now be known as the Beck Paradox. “The shooter was nuts. Pure and simple,” Beck said. He states that people who believe 9/11 was an inside job by the government are dangerous. Funny, given that (according to Dana Milbank) Beck has previously warned his viewers of FEMA operating a concentration camp in Wyoming. Paradox Number One. Beck continues on about how fascism and communism are two schools of thought “along two rails of the same train.” But later he says that it’s “almost like there’s no difference between these two to this guy” (referring to Loughner). Paradox Number Two. Beck also stresses that incidents such as Loughner’s shooting are because of the individual, not a group (such as the Tea Party). But he goes on to discuss the events of 9/11, saying they took down the Twin Towers in the name of Allah, and that “the media” focuses too much on the individuals and not on the group they might be a part of. Paradox Number Three.

I think it’s pretty easy to see how someone with the life and mental troubles of Loughner and his strong interest in politics would hear Beck’s contradictions and interpret things in possibly dangerous ways. Hell, I watched the video three times and I still don’t really know what Beck is advocating for. As Milbank pointed out, Beck once said on his show, “Hold these people responsible. If you know they go shopping on Saturday at Safeway, get in the parking lot at Safeway.” Oh shit.

Yet making Beck a scapegoat isn’t quite right. It’d be like blaming Karl Marx for the Russian Revolution, blaming words rather than the atmosphere they were said in. However, Marx was dead by then and couldn’t exactly defend or clarify his words. Beck can… and doesn’t really. He just calls Laughner crazy. Crazy he may be, but he’s not the only one. I found this comment posted on one of Justin Faith’s YouTube responses to the Tucson shootings:

The Jared Loughner they Have in Custody is not the same Jared Loughner that had the Website and political views. The person in custody is not even Jared Loughner at all. Check the eye color, and the massive moles on his face, to the pics of the activist Jared Loughner that was supposed to be the shooter. Two Different people entirely. Just like Saddam Hussein, a political agenda between the media and the NWO to take away gun rights from everyone.

And the conspiracy theories begin anew…

However, Glenn Beck (as much as it pains me to say it) does make a good point. If the tweet from the Daily Kos saying, “Mission accomplished Sarah Palin,” was truly released before we knew the name of the shooter (going off Beck’s word, here) then the “mainstream media’s” jumping to conclusions should be addressed. But Beck also says the Kos should not be responsible for saying things like this; it’d be the same as holding Sarah Palin responsible. Of course, this is after he’s bad mouthed the “liberal press” beyond the point of no return. Paradox Number Four, for those still keeping track.

Beck is not the only one making crazy contradictions though. The charming Jon Stewart did a segment on Representative Steve Cohen who, one week after stressing for more civil discourse in politics, compared Republicans to Nazis (check out the video here: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-20-2011/word-warcraft). Introducing the Cohen Paradox…

Why did he do it?

In Loughner’s youtube video he states, “my favorite activity is conscience dreaming... some of you don’t dream-- sadly.” Loughner was implying that he lives in a dream world, he’s awake in the sense that he’s functioning, but he’s not facing reality. Loughner lives in Arizona’s district 8, which is served by Rep. Gabriellle Gifford (msnbc.msn.com). according to previous statements made by Loughner, he believes that over half of the people living in District 8 are illiterate, and the government isn’t doing anything to help them because the government is brainwashing the people. Gabrielle Gifford was the center of his attack. Her wwebsite states that she supports the increase of solar/renewable energy in district 8. It is rumor that Loughner was acting on subliminal instructions from Palin and Sharon Angle to take Gabrielle Gifford out, but Conor P. Williams believes this isn’t true at all, and Loughner was just using common anti government rhetoric. After reviewing Lougner’s youtube video’s and reading comments that previous classmates said about him, I can pretty much infer that Loughner was somewhat mentally unstable. Previous classmates stated that “you can tell there was something not right about him.” Which brings me back to the beginning of my post where I quoted Loughner. He said himself conscience dreaming is his favorite activity. From listening to him talk you would believe he was crazy. But I believe you have to be somewhat competent to plan a crime, especially one of the nature he committed. So in conclusion, from my findings, I believe Loughner is a simple case of “monkey see, monkey do.” He was a college drop out who obviously didn’t have a lot going for his life so his crime made him feel important, as if he was getting the government back for doing what he believes to be a poor job in district 8. This explination of why may not be the most interesting, but as Ranke stated, history may seem colorless or boring, but the point is to show how things happen.

Marika Reese

Why did Loughner do it? (Or what made him do it?)

The short answer is that I don't have an answer, and I believe from reading about the shooting incident that most people don't completely understand why either. It is hard, if not impossible, to comprehend what might bring any individual to commit such extreme acts of violence. I think that certain beliefs Loughner had might have driven him to commit the shooting, but that his mental instability ultimately led to the violence he committed.

Many of his radical beliefs are evident in the videos that he posted on his YouTube channel. Loughner mentions English grammar in his first video entitled, "Hello." He claims that, "The majority of people, who reside in District-8, are illiterate- hilarious. I don't control your English grammar structure, but you control your English grammar structure." This statement appears confusing, if not the rant of a madman, but put into context it can be seen as connected to a radical right-wing ideology. Eve Conant of The Daily Beast connects Loughner’s obsession with grammar to the far-right activist David Wynn Miller who believes in a 'truth language' that can throw off the government. This is just one example among many, including his concern about the currency, where Loughner’s rants appear to be connected to right wing ideologies and rhetoricians.

Who is to blame for the shooting? Loughner is obviously to blame because he physically committed the act, but can blame be extended to include radical individuals who may have influenced his own actions and beliefs? Milbank directly addresses this issue by examining the rhetoric and following of Glenn Beck. She writes that while Beck disavows violence, he also encourages viewers to read between the lines and infer things he does not say aloud. As a result, there have been incidents of stalking and violence towards government officials that may have been connected directly to Glenn Beck’s radio or television programs such as in the cases of Greg Giusti who threatened Nancy Pelosi after Beck said publically that he wished to poison her. A crazy person watching Beck could have thought he was doing the world a favor by taking on this violent Nancy Pelosi. Nonetheless, it was Giusti rather than Beck who seriously threatened Pelosi and was probably mentally unstable.

Ultimately, who is to blame? Individuals who call for violent, radical action or the crazy people who carry out this violence? Even though Loughner may have been influenced by violent, radical ideologies, it is difficult to blame rhetoric alone. The NY Times article entitled, “Behind Jared Loughner’s Mug-Shot Grin,” is fascinating in that it attempts to chronicle Loughner's slow but startling descent into insanity, marked by moments of failure and disappointment. I believe that ideology did certainly play a part in Loughner’s violent choices but that ultimately the shooting was the result of Loughner’s mental instability and that the violence was influenced by radical ideology.

Should we have seen this coming?

The big question on everyone’s mind is, why? Why would someone do such a horrible thing? Why congresswoman Giffords? Why was this young man so angry? Why was this not prevented?

After watching the YouTube videos that were posted by Loughner it is clear to me that this is a very mentally unstable individual. He has a lot of hatred towards the government and how the government runs the country. In watching the mind controller video I got the sense that he felt the government was brainwashing us all and that we would all be much better off under another source of control. Another video from ABC News (A report on Loughner and the entire incident) mentioned that a couple years ago Loughner applied and was rejected by the military. And when students from his high school spoke about him they used words such as “loner”, “weird”, “didn’t fit in with anyone”, so it is obvious that the young man is no stranger to rejection. Maybe the rejection of the government put him over the edge. In addition to that information the ABC news story talked about the letter that Loughner kept from the congresswoman in his safe. The letter was from years ago and it thanked him for coming to meet with her. Although according to a friend, Loughner was very unhappy with Giffords’ reaction to his questions. Loughner confided in a friend that the congresswoman seemed confused by his questions and that she didn’t understand what he was saying at all, which made him very upset. It is clear that his peers and even the government did not accept Loughner, and that type of rejection could have possibly drove him to do a terrible act. Since Giffords and Loughner had a personal encounter he may have felt more anger towards her than others, which is why he chose her as his target.

As we discussed in class, shooters such as Loughner are remembered and in a disgusting sense become famous. Everyone now knows Loughner along with his ideas, theories and story, and maybe that is why he did it. When he gained the attention of the public so did his ideas. So even though he is now locked up his ideas are not, there is a possibility that they can be passed on to others who will seek them out. Just the idea of being understood by someone, anyone, could have given Loughner the drive to pursue his plan.

Now onto the question of, why was this act not prevented? Some say that putting Loughner in an institution could have prevented the entire incident or taking away shows such as Glenn Becks could lessen the influence, but I don’t believe that. According to an article in Time magazine Loughner did show warning signs of being mentally ill but he did not put himself or anyone else in danger (before the shooting). For that reason, the only way he could have been admitted to an institution was by admitting himself. Which would not have been possible since Loughner believed that he had the solution to a better government and everyone else had it wrong. He did not believe he was unstable but more so the rest of the country was. Networks such as Fox News that has shows similar to Glenn Becks should not be to blame for these types of incidents. Someone who is pushed over the edge to do the extreme from watching these types of shows is an unstable individual to begin with. With that being said, I do not believe Glenn Beck is responsible for these extreme events and that in this circumstance the shooting could not have been prevented.

Why did Loughner do it? Why did he kill Congresswoman Giffords? After looking at the video Loughner posted on his youtube channel on December 15th 2010, which all seems like nonsense babbling about nothing at all, but I came to one line that I thought stood out of all of them. After 47 seconds into the video, he writes “…If I have my civil rights, then this message wouldn’t have happen.” What I concluded from this sentence was that Loughner experienced oppression from someone or something and couldn’t speak out about it that is why he posted this video on youtube claiming that if he had the right to speak out according to his civil right to free speech then he wouldn’t have wrote these statements and made the video at all. Thus, inevitably, this led to him hating the government system and taking it out on Giffords.

The article I read on the Daily Beast website analyzed the books Loughner listed as some of his favorites and stated that “In examining Loughner’s list of favorite books, which includes Orwell and Mein Kampf, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Potok notes that an anti-government thread runs through all those works. In addition, Loughner’s obsession with currency not being backed by gold and silver “ ‘is a core idea of the militia, or Patriot, movement.’ ” This finding adds more to Loughner’s mindset that he had on getting his right of free speech back and getting back at the government system for oppressing his right.

From reading Milbank’s work about Beck talking violent on radio shows, I can see how this can influence a large number of audiences to act out on a government that they have been influenced to believe were corrupt and oppressive. Maybe Loughner were one of those who listened and acted out on what he believed. Look at his age; he looks like a young guy who is still in those rebellious stages of a teen who don’t want to listen to authority and don’t want to obey the law. Going back to what Loughner wrote on his youtube video, he stated that if he had his civil rights then this wouldn’t have happened, which is indicative of his belief that the government is oppressive and he went after a congress person to get back at the government that oppressed his rights.

My new favorite Facebook status update of all time

posted earlier today, by a friend of mine:

"according to the new zodiac, i no longer share a sign with Hitler!"

Posting assignment #1 (due Sunday 1/23, 11:59 P.M.): Why did Loughner do it?

According to Ranke, you make history by going into the archives, finding sources ("memoirs, diaries, letters, reports from embassies, and original narratives of eyewitnesses"), and putting the facts together into a story that tells it "how it actually was" (wie es eigentlich gewesen).

According to Oswald (via Weidman), you make history by killing the president of the United States.

There are, of course, serious issues with both of these ways of making history.  Oswald literally killed someone.  (Byck too -- two people -- even without "succeeding".)  And Ranke, who only deals with people who "appeared in a pronouncedly active or leading role" in a given moment, ends up justifying these people's mass killing (of "infidels") as historically necessary.

With all that in mind:  in this post, you're going to make some history.  Specifically, you'll make some history about the case of Jared Lee Loughner, who tried to kill Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords about two weeks ago.  That part -- the what -- is not controversial; every source I've found pretty much agrees on what he did and where, when, and how he did it.  They disagree sharply, however, about why.

That's where you come in.

Here's what you need to do:

1)  Search the web for information -- primary sources (in this case, stuff written/made by Loughner himself) and secondary sources (news articles, analyses, etc.) -- on this why question.  Read, watch, and look at these sources.  Lots and lots of them.  The more, and the more varied, the better.  See my email for some places to start...but then go further!

2)  Read Milbank, and re-read Clarke, and take notes on how these texts might (or might not) help make sense of the Loughner situation, in light of all the other stuff you've read/watched/found about it.

3)  Write a post, at least 300 words long, in which you provide a (tentative) answer to the question:  why did Loughner do it?  (Or, put differently, what made him do it?)  As a good Rankean historian, you must ground all of your arguments in evidence from your sources.  In this case, I'm asking you to draw evidence from at least: 

• ONE PRIMARY SOURCE (something Loughner actually wrote or made), 
• TWO OTHER SOURCES (primary or secondary) you found, and
• EITHER CLARKE OR MILBANK (or both, if you'd like).

And just a reminder:  this is informal writing.  No need for an introduction or a conclusion or formal citations or inflated "academic" style.  Just show us what you found, and how those things led you to the argument that you're making.  Main directive:  don't bore your friends (or yourself).  The more fun you have writing it, the more fun we'll all have reading it!

--

Finally, take some time on Monday (after you've posted on Sunday night) to read your colleagues' posts and write a thoughtful comment on at least one of them.  (All of this will, of course, set up our discussion of Milbank, Clarke, Beck, and Loughner on Tuesday.)