Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:14 AM ET, 01/10/2011

Sarah Palin's rhetoric

By Jennifer Rubin

Sarah Palin was unfairly tagged by many on the left, and by many supposedly responsible news organizations, for somehow having provoked the Tucson shooter. There is zero evidence so far that the shooter was aware of any of Palin's campaign material. The evidence is overwhelming that he is deranged. The hypocrisy is jaw-dropping: In the Fort Hood shooting, many liberals ignored evidence that the motive was Islamic radicalism and labeled the shooter a lunatic; in Tucson, everything we know suggests the shooter was a lunatic, and yet, they peddle the notion that he was inspired by conservative campaign rhetoric.

Lost in the shuffle was an utterance for which Palin should be held to account. Last week, she accused the president of intentional weakening the economy. (And this is the voice of someone seriously contemplating a presidential run, mind you.) This is crazy talk and should be rejected.

Conservatives generally think President Obama's policies are terribly wrong and that he unwisely placed other priorities above the economic recovery. But is he intentionally sabotaging the economy? No. That suggestion is baseless and illogical. (He wants to sink the economy so as to improve his re-election chances?)

Before the Palin defenders attack, I will repeat: Palin's campaign rhetoric is not in any way responsible for the horrific Arizona shooting, as a batch of leftwing bloggers claimed. What is distasteful is not homicide-provoking. Palin's penchant for saying outlandish and insulting things -- one day it is Charles Krauthammer and the next is this barb at the president -- should be addressed on its own terms with a stern rebuke. And should she throw her hat into the 2012 presidential ring, her opponents should have the nerve to rebut such comments.

By Jennifer Rubin  | January 10, 2011; 9:14 AM ET
Categories:  Sarah Palin  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: CPAC boycotters
Next: Friday question answered

Comments

Jennifer is engaging in the exact same game she is claiming to be pushing back against, marginalizing commentary she disagrees with by painting it all with the same broad brush strokes.

I think the commentary regarding Sarah Palin is less "she's to blame for the Giffords shooting" and more "she's a prime example of someone who consistently engages in over the top, sometimes reckless rhetoric," and is rarely called out by her own regarding it.

Posted by: mustangs79 | January 10, 2011 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Jennifer you agree the presidents economic plans are obviously misguided and not working, i agree with that. I have heard many people say, maybe even yourself say how intelligent this president is. My only question is if he so intelligent what is his motive for making obviously bad policy decisions? His background suggests he is coming from a different philosophy than has generally been thought in U.S. economic and social standards, such as free markets, capitalism etc. So if he is not stupid then by traditional U.S. definition maybe he is intentionally weakening for whatever reason the U.S. economy.

Posted by: eddiehaskall | January 10, 2011 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Deranged people can be influenced, too. Ask yourself what exactly was "distasteful" about putting gunsight crosshairs on the map.
There is your answer.

Posted by: rnotigan | January 10, 2011 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Palin probably can't be blamed for the specific person who committed this specific act but her fiery rhetoric and wild hate filled claims are intended to enflame and polarize which IS the cause of the string of violence set into motion by rightwing extremism.
The Palin's, Savage's, Beck's, Limbaugh's etc looking surprised and claiming "I didn't pull the trigger" is about as immature as their wild accusations that have no purpose to illuminate, they have to know what they are saying is not true, but to polarize and create wedges, for politics but more for self enrichment. They avoiding responsibility would be no different than a commanding officer pleading innocent for war crimes that he planned and directed, with "I didn't pull the trigger or torture"

I personally do think they believe any of their own claims but they do know it adds millions to their bank accounts so they continue and when old claims fail to incite anymore, they ratchet it up another notch to be even more over the top. They know it appeals to a certain type of person, those with psychological problems, tea party members who skipped class on history days, and those highly susceptible to propaganda and being roused to action without thinking. They profit from giving the lit match to the ones who drop it in the dynamite factory. They reliably argue that they did not drop the match, some crazy did. Those crazies are what Palin and her ilk depend on as their predictable base.

Posted by: km6xz | January 10, 2011 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Just because Obama, Pelosi & Reed aren't doing anything to help private sector job recovery doesn't mean they've doing nothing.

Goverment workers and the Washington, DC area have survived this recession just fine. Hopefully the new Rep House majority can change this and promote private sector growth.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Jennifer-Palin was referring to Obama's own remarks on raising the debt ceiling when he was in the Senate. You might want to read her remarks more carefully, instead of engaging in the same smear tactics you accuse others.

Posted by: cajunkate | January 10, 2011 10:12 AM | Report abuse

This psycho-lefty shooter's history with Giffords and derangement goes back to 2007 per the writings found in his safe yesterday.

Palin was an unknown governor then and the tea parties movement hadn't even started... but let's not let facts get in the way of the left's routine blood libel that comes out whenever one of these tragic events occurs.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 10:21 AM | Report abuse

How objective of you Jennifer. Eight lines of the excerpt in today's paper are devoted to the "good" words spoken after the shooting and the other 80% to attacking those who would have the audacity to point to the rhetoric that needs to be toned down, whether it contributed to this tragedy or not.

Perhaps its a coincidence that this happened in a districted literally "targeted" by Sarah Palin. Perhaps its a coincidence that it happened in the state where the Tea Party candidate for Governor referred to Second Amendment options. A district where the opponent posed in combat gear with an automatic weapon. An environment in which the Congresswoman herself expressed concern about the references to violence. Not a word about any of that from You. It's that same old "we're the victim" mentality that as put this dialogue where it is.

I know your motives, and Limbaugh's and Hannity's and Boorstein's -- its a living. When this type of violence occurs in my more liberal district, I will call it a coincidence to the rhetoric. In the meantime, your next check for the work you have decided to do is in the mail.

Posted by: tradeczar | January 10, 2011 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Nice one Jennifer. And just the time to bring it up. As if there is some type of moral equivalency between this statement of Palin's (that you feel was wrong )and what the MSM is doing in trying to pin these murders on her.

You're comparing oranges & apples. Sorry, I'm wrong, what you're really doing is trying to smear Palin. Join the club, it's a big one. You're a perfect fit for the WaPo. How disappointing. Now I know why they hired you.

Posted by: jcp370 | January 10, 2011 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Jen,

Is Krauthammer himself therefore insulting, outrageous, and deserving of a rebuke for saying Obama and modern liberalism seek American decline as "a choice?" c.f., http://is.gd/kutF1 . It seems to me that he and Palin are saying roughly the same thing; she just in more plain-spoken language.

Posted by: irishspy | January 10, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

If Obama, Reed & Pelosi were intentionally trying to punish the private sector for the benefit of government workers what would they have done differently... Nothing.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 10, 2011 10:39 AM | Report abuse

As cajunkate noted, Palin was playing a little game of gotcha with Obama's own words; beyond that, Obama is certainly trying to weaken the private sector relative to the government, and he is certainly trying to weaken the US relative to the "international community." Of course one might say his intentions are ultimately good: the private sector and the US are "too strong," and for a socialist the "private sector" is not equivalent to "the economy." So, he is trying to weaken what we see as "the economy"--how's that? (Noting, again, that that's not what Palin was saying.)

The real question is whether one should place one's opponent outside of the "mainstream," or outside of "legitimate" discourse. Whether one should or not, both sides are presently doing exactly that. Maybe it's because both sides--at least the most partisan, which may also mean the most engaged, on both sides--see the other side that way. I certainly see the Progressive movement as deliberately undermining American freedom (which they consider a danger to the world and the earth), and a quick glance at the comments above show how they see me and mine. If we see each other that way, should we not say so? But in that case, we would be guilty of letting dire threats, as we see it, to the Republic, go unnoted, and hence unhindered.

The real and only question is violence. Anyone who initiates it should be arrested and severely punished; anyone who promotes (explicitly promotes--I'm not interested in the climatologists of opinion here) should be unequivocally denounced and marginalized to the extent possible. When the will to do that weakens so that, for example, someone committing political violence is pardoned by a governor or president whose opponent was the victim of the violence, then we will be in deep trouble.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Although both sides do it, the political right has said many things that made a lot of crazies come out of the woodwork, especially during the last 2-3 years. And they do it with impunity.

The talk of death panels, birthers, or sharia law has made for a nasty political climate. People like Sarah Palin need to take responsibility for their actions.

Tell Sarah Palin and the right wing crazies that threats of violence have no place in politics.

Posted by: WhatchutalkinboutRighty | January 10, 2011 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Ms. Rubin. I have to tell you that it give me tremendous joy to see the Palinistas turn on you because you dared to utter a few negative words about her. What joins these Palinistas together is their righteous and unbreakable devotion to all things Palin regardless of detail or context. They'll stick with her regardless of her stupid or incorrect statements and despite the fact that or possibly even because of the fact that she boldly incites hatred, violence, and divisiveness to further her self serving.

You see, you are one of them. You are a Palinista. You talk their talk because usually it benefits you. You usually have common enemies - Obama, Democrats, the media (not the right-leaning media which has a majority of the market share because why would the right-leaning media give up its best-kept secret that MSM is no longer left-leaning and hasn't been for years?)

But this crazy train doesn't have any breaks, Ms. Rubin. If you stop talking the talk for even a nano-second they will not hesitate to run you down like a dog in the street. And nothing gives me more pleasure than watching the Palinistas rend apart one of their own.

Posted by: rgray | January 10, 2011 11:09 AM | Report abuse

The approach of Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, Bachman, all of FOX News and other right wing spokesman always has a tinge of violence. They speak about defending, taking back, targeting, aiming, reload, etc. in ways that are meant to intimidate and incite. Of course they are to blame to some degree for fostering a culture of fear, hatred and violence. They can protest the fact that people find them at fault all they want. But the strength of their protest speaks volumes about the truth of their culpability.

Posted by: MickyD1 | January 10, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

This is churlish and defensive bull - no one denies the guy was a loner and nutcase. But when this loner nutcase went out and got a gun, he didn't shoot a co-worker or fellow student, a teacher, a family member, a movie star or a pop star. He shot a member of Congress, and there's a reason for that, no matter how much you and your right-wing friends try and pretend otherwise.

Posted by: dwt301 | January 10, 2011 11:23 AM | Report abuse

To say this was not politically motivated is simplifying it too much, to say this is the result of Sarah Palin is simplifying it too much. Yes, he was disturbed but there are a lot of disturbed people that do not target political figures. Once again both sides are playing politics rather than solving things here. Obviously extremist talk, and a lot of talk radio is extremist, goes a long way in triggering things like this. A GOP congressman from AZ actually went so far as to say Obama is not a friend of humanity and that's not extreme? People need to stop acting like children about this and realize the rhetoric needs to tone down. A 9 year old girl was killed and we still can't get behind this? How sad.

Posted by: craighenslin | January 10, 2011 11:27 AM | Report abuse

In fact, Gov. Sarah Palin has never advocated violence against anyone. She has not said she wanted to push anyone down a flight of stairs (Kathy Griffin), nor has she called for the rape & impregnation of anyone's minor child (David Letterman). Loughner was a loony loner with an obsession about Gabrielle Giffords. Sarah Palin had zero influence upon him.

Posted by: bubbasouth | January 10, 2011 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin should not be held responsible for the shootings for the same reason that she should not be held responsible for anything outside her immediate range of control. She should be treated like a child. Anyone who listens to that child and acts on what it says has their own problems.

Posted by: kuato | January 10, 2011 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Palin is not directly responsible for the shootings in Tuscan. Many people have contributed to the over-the-top, hateful language that some deranged souls may take as gospel and act on. Palin is only one of the contributers. We need leadership on both sides of the aisle to strongly and repeatedly speak against the demonizing of opponents. However, what we'll probably get is more finger pointing and demagoging.

Posted by: fountainad | January 10, 2011 12:09 PM | Report abuse

When Palin put the "crosshairs graphic" on the Congressional candidates and said "...reload..." and one of those pictured is shot what does one expect commentators to say.

When the graphic was first revealed comments were made then that if something happens to one of the candidates/Congress people she would be held accountable. Should she be? Unless we know that a shooter said he wanted to do what she said we can't blame her. However, she can be blamed for the hateful speech that the graphic was.

If she felt so comfortable with what she said/did why was the graphic taken down after the shooting?

Posted by: rlj1 | January 10, 2011 12:17 PM | Report abuse

This tone it down crap is so formulaic and feeble that it's clearly not going anywhere, thankfully. Believe it or, even after some lunatic guns down someone for reasons we, and probably he, don't know, people will continue to speak freely. Better luck next time.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 12:18 PM | Report abuse

The left won't give up their self-serving effort to blame Sarah Palin. who needs evidence?

Palin campaign literature showed cross-hairs on Giffords's district, a metaphor used so often by both paties that it's a cliche. Bloggers have found many similar examples from the left. There's also no indication that Loughner ever saw the Palin literature, and he had focused on Gifford as early as 2007. Doesn't matter to the leftwing nuts.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 12:26 PM | Report abuse

A FAR more reasonable post would ask, why are crazy people allowed to buy guns, at least in Arizona and Virginia?

Posted by: CardFan | January 10, 2011 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Stop obsessing, she's very unlikely to run. She's only viable as a moneymaker if she's controversial though. Thus we will see more intemperate statements, not less.

This is about Palin Inc., not 2012.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 10, 2011 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Palin alone? No. But the cumulative voices of the less civilized extremists can have terrible affects on mentally ill people. Do not underestimate what vitriolic and conspiracy rhetoric can have on unstable minds. It's time for the screamers to take responsibility for their abuse of free speech. We don't have just rights in this nation. We also have responsibilities.

Posted by: jckdoors | January 10, 2011 12:35 PM | Report abuse

The point is that extremists of all political factions use venomous rhetoric to stoke their constituents and it needs to stop. Instead of reconsidering their tactics in light of this tragic shooting, both sides are just spewing more venom and claiming to be victims of unfounded verbal attacks. I will never vote for another candidate that invokes hate and fear. We do without that type of leadership.

Posted by: skania1 | January 10, 2011 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Personally I think Sara Palin is way too liberal for my taste.
Even so, I found the target shtick and the gun rallies to be juvenile, irresponsible and they just plain made me cringe.
Not the type of thing I would like to see any party display.

Posted by: rexreddy | January 10, 2011 12:41 PM | Report abuse

I am neither from the left, nor a news organization, and I feel Palin's rhetoric, even if not responsible, was in poor taste.

As a simple rule, if you don't want to be associated when someone is shot, don't put crosshairs over their district, and don't use terms like reload when addressing your constituency.

Problem solved.

Palin should step up and admit while they aren't connected, her rhetoric is something she regrets.

Posted by: spynnal | January 10, 2011 12:42 PM | Report abuse


Reload Boys, we have some political-in-jons at 12 O’Clock High

"And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," Obama said.

It is not surprising that Jared Loughner got bitter and clinged to his father’s guns.

It is not surprising that Sarah Palin, Rupert Murdoch, Sean Hanity, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh have antipathy toward people aren’t like them.

It is not surprising that Dick Army, Michele Bachmann, John Boehner, John McCain ,and Joe Wilson spew their anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-Affordable Health Care sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

McCain brought Palin to the civilized lower 48. Palin brought violence.

Jared Loughner– 1st Degree Murders
Sarah Palin
Rupert Murdoch
Sean Hanity
Bill O'Reilly
Glenn Beck
Rush Limbaugh

Dick Army-2nd Degree Murders
Michele Bachmann
John Boehner
John McCain
Joe Wilson

This is the dirty dozen that has blood on their hands. Within the last two years they have single handily set the tone with their reload mentality that will shape our future political landscape.

Sister Palin have suggested that the cross hairs on here web page’ map was targets, and it is surprising to note that if your nine years old child had been killed this weekend you would be comfort by your religion, local news papers commentators and FOX News.

Posted by: nateminor | January 10, 2011 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: CardFan
A FAR more reasonable post would ask, why are crazy people allowed to buy guns, at least in Arizona and Virginia?
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXGood point.
Maybe a computerized psychological test would help.
Use a kiosk just like when you get a drivers license.
You could pose questions that would cause them to exhibit behavioral patterns that would disqualify them.


Posted by: rexreddy | January 10, 2011 12:52 PM | Report abuse

remember the Palinites getting all upset over "lipstick on a pig"? It was an old advertising saying describing a difficult marketing problem that they insisted was meant to be taken literally and was a personal insult directed at Palin. Now however they want to insist that Palin's gun imagry, crosshairs, and inflammatory language shouldn't be taken literally that we are all supposed to just accept its benign intent. That's hypocrisy - you can't have it both ways Palinites!

Posted by: hohandy1 | January 10, 2011 12:57 PM | Report abuse

"Palin campaign literature showed cross-hairs on Giffords's district, a metaphor used so often by both paties that it's a cliche. Bloggers have found many similar examples from the left."

Where. Name one current or ex-political candidate (who operates on the national level) on the left who has used images of violence, such as crosshairs on a candidate, in order to advance a cause. Making up facts seems to be becoming mainstream for the tea-bag right.

Palin's symbolic representations are not so much to blame for the recent violence, but do seem to be emblematic of the lack of civil discourse as our country charts a course forward.

Lies and deliberately misleading rhetoric (such as the unfounded hyperbole regarding "death panels") are desperate attempts to avoid a true and valid discussion about alternate ways forward. When an opponent and opposing idea is deemed wrong and thus deserves not to be discussed, but rather eliminated, America has reached a sad and defining end-point as to its potential and its leadership in the world.

Posted by: josh13 | January 10, 2011 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Fair or no, there is nothing Ms. Palin can do now to keep this from sticking to her. The narrative has already been set. Too bad for her. I was looking forward to her showing in Iowa. Now I think she'll be a no-show.

Posted by: fishellb | January 10, 2011 1:07 PM | Report abuse

.


This Jared Loughner nut (the shooter) was for the gold standard and against womens rights (abortion).


That's so far to the right that it's getting into Ayn Rand territory.


And the Southern Poverty Law Center said that the language control stuff that the guy was talking about is also something you'll find on the far right fringe.


Sorry Teabagger goons, the guy is not a lefty.


Nice try...


One would hope that there would be a few days given over to mourning for the dead and public good wishes for the full recovery of the injured in the aftermath of the Tucson shooting this morning. But since we live in a Twitter and Facebook and Instant Messaging world, such hope no longer gets a chance. Efforts to set the narrative are already fully under way within the extremist right.


The Right Wing Noise Machine (Faux News, AM Hate Radio etc) whose violent, eliminationist rhetoric has polluted the air waves and bled into other corporate mainsteam media outlets the past couple of decades, ramping itself up a little more each year, especially with the arrival of an African American in the White House, are, of course, denying that the shootings of a Congresswoman, a judge, a child and bystanders on a street corner in Arizona have anything to do with their savage words.


No surprise. One thing the Right Wing Lunatic Fringe is good at is refusing to accept any responsibility for the consequences of their murderous hate talk, whether it's Timothy McVeigh blowing up a federal building or Scott Roeder assassinating a doctor etc.

.

Posted by: DrainYou | January 10, 2011 1:19 PM | Report abuse

YES GOV PALIN caused world war 1 and the Renaissance. Also THE BOXER REBELLION. Stop this nonsense.

Posted by: bulldogss | January 10, 2011 1:20 PM | Report abuse

what complete and utter nonsense.

even if the shooter didn't hear palins comments or read her tweets or see her offensive bullseye target hit list on her website, he still was part of the polluted national discourse palin and the tea party spread like a hateful virus.

there is blood on Palins hands and she should be held accountable.
Bin Laden wasn't on any of those planes on 9/11, but he should be held accountable for that, just as Palin deserves to be for this.

Arrest her.

Posted by: MarilynManson | January 10, 2011 1:25 PM | Report abuse

When a terrorist shouts "Allh Akhbar!" during an attack we are assured by teh Left that there's no connection to other Muslims or Islam in general.

And anyone who makes such a connection is a hateful bigot.

No such restraint by the Left here.

Before the blood's even dry they're trying to blame a graphic on Sarah Palin's website.

No evidence that this murder was politically motivated - the gunman also killed a Republican judge.

No evidence, no clear motive other than insanity - But that's beside the point to the Left.

Just dream up a connection and keep repeating it, hoping the narrative sticks.

Again, before the blood of a 9 year old girl is even dry.

Sickening political opportunism.

Posted by: drjcarlucci | January 10, 2011 1:26 PM | Report abuse

I propose a high level delegation of Republican elders travel to
Alaska and respectfully request Palin tone down the insurrection
talk if for no other reason than a Depression and two wars.

Posted by: WmLaney | January 10, 2011 1:33 PM | Report abuse

It is not her fault like it is not Germany's fault Hitler slaughtered 80 million people. More and more due to violence perpetrated by her party people are suffering. Remember her lot thought Mao just went to far with conservatism.

Posted by: mullarkeymichael | January 10, 2011 1:36 PM | Report abuse

One point--Darn Gov Palin can market her brand. Some forecast her take in just 36 months at $64 million excluding her family. Just so amazing. PLEASE can i be this dumb ?

Posted by: bulldogss | January 10, 2011 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Everyone knows Palin had nothing to do with this nut. Blaming Palin was nothing but another opportunity by the Democrats and the MSM to win over the independents and those who turned against the Democrats in this last election. It's already been confirmed by the friends of the Tucson shooter that he was a left wing pothead. Left wing potheads don't listen to Palin do they. If you think everything Obama has done hasn't been intentionally then you haven't been paying close attention to the motives behind Obama's policies. Obama can't rebuild like he planned if he still has America structures in place can he. In order to rebuild anything, you have to tear down the old structures. Anything American is old structure to Obama and remember what Obama says every chance he gets. He's moving forward. He's not go back to the way we used to do things. Intentionally? You bet he is. It's time to open your eyes, don't you think?

Posted by: houstonian | January 10, 2011 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I agree she had nothing to do with the shooting. But she is a contributor to inciting ignorant, bigoted followers. Conservatives have some very legitimate gripes with the Democrats but plain rarley addresses those concerns she rather incite her mob using hate filled incendiary rhetoric. Sarah Palin represents the worst in American politics. I await the rabid nonsensical response from her blind followers

Posted by: rcc_2000 | January 10, 2011 1:52 PM | Report abuse

I do believe that the shooters father was quoted this morning as saying that he blames this whole thing on The Tea Party!

Posted by: imposter | January 10, 2011 1:57 PM | Report abuse

So the right thinks that movies and music warp American minds, but not their own inflammatory rhetoric and images?

Time to step up for a dose of that individual responsibility you like to talk about so much.

Posted by: chemguy1157 | January 10, 2011 1:59 PM | Report abuse

The MSM journalists and Professional Left all urged caution after Ft. Hood, but now race to blame Palin.

Posted by: drjcarlucci | January 10, 2011 2:09 PM | Report abuse

It is curious that Palin's comment about Obama intentionally weakening our economy is part of this posting. This type of rhetoric is part and parcel of the type of statement that Palin makes that feeds the fringe. She (and her fellow "shock pundits" like Beck and Limbaugh) are constantly portraying the left (and moderates) as evil, unpatriotic enemies of the State. If a deranged individual hears enough of this, they may well view actions such as this as not only acceptable - but heroic.

Posted by: koygdb | January 10, 2011 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I don't blame Sarah Palin for this particular act. But I will never vote for someone who puts bulleyes up on her opponent's states, and the term "bullseye" is her term used in her Tweets at the time.

I think Mrs. Palin should continue to talk on the Fox network and write books. She is too irresponsible to run for public office.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | January 10, 2011 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I blame Palin

Posted by: johng1 | January 10, 2011 2:16 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me observing from Europe that the only thing that Sarah Palin has been guilty of in the past two years is encouraging millions of ordinary American citizens to engage in the politics of their Republic but going out to vote. She has urged them to do this, not by founding any new fringe parties but by operating within the existing party structures. Far from inciting violence it seems to me that far more hate has been directed at her than the other way around.

Posted by: genecarr100 | January 10, 2011 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Miss Rubin seems to be getting her analogies wrong. In the Fort Hood Shooting, Republicans tried to blame all Muslims as pushing hatred of America, which is certainly not the case. Their logic went like this: Fort Hood Shooter was Muslim and went to a cleric who uses incendiary rhetoric against the US. The cleric was obviously Muslim. Therefore, all Muslims are similar. Therefore, no Muslim shall be able to practice their religion near a patriotic site.

To keep the analogy alike, reporters and liberals would have to be saying that all Republicans are to blame for this shooting because Palin is a Republican.

This is not the case.

We all believe in freedom of speech. We also feel that one has to be responsible, not just for their immediate actions, but also for their speech.

Most understand that men like Beck and Rush and women like Palin use their speech to make money, and most would not act on the silliness that spews from these folks. When these characters do, though, use violent language or demonize others to a point that their followers view those people as inhuman or unAmerican, it should be all of our responsibility to denounce that language, not pander to it.

And though we all want to say that this guy acted alone and was off the deep end, let's not forget that this language has lead to over 50% of Republicans believing Obama is not a US citizen.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | January 10, 2011 2:22 PM | Report abuse

I'd also argue that naming bills the Repeal of the Jobs Killing Obamacare adds to the fire and is also unacceptable.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | January 10, 2011 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Jennifer Rubin writes
"There is zero evidence so far that the shooter was aware of any of Palin's campaign material. ... Palin's campaign rhetoric is not in any way responsible for the horrific Arizona shooting."

In the first sentence quoted above, Ms Rubin acknowledges that 'so far' there is no evidence the shooter was motivated by Palin's dispicable rhetoric. Yet, Ms Rubin then draws a finite conclusion that such rhetoric is entirely unrelated. It would be more accurate to say "until evidence surfaces to the contrary, there is no indication the shooter was motivated by hyperbolic, tasteless & divisive rhetoric from the right."

Posted by: bsimon1 | January 10, 2011 2:29 PM | Report abuse

It's not working, lefties, and it's not gonna work--but don't let me try and stop you from turning yourselves into an edifying spectacle, as at the Paul Wellstone funeral in 2002. The American public can never have too many reasons for despising you guys. (Oh, was that too "demonizing"?)

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 2:29 PM | Report abuse

drjcarlucci,

Again, get your analogy right. These two events would be similar had Republicans blamed crazy Muslims and now Democrats blaming Palin. But Republicans attempted to blame all Muslims. Democrats are not blaming all Republicans. They're merely asking those who put crosshairs over congress people be accountable for their language.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | January 10, 2011 2:29 PM | Report abuse

adam62,

You act like Democrats are just now asking that Republicans and Tea Baggers tone down their rhetoric. Remember how angry you were when Civil Rights leaders decided that Tea Baggers used dangerous speech and were concerned about the outcome. You called them race baiters at the time.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | January 10, 2011 2:32 PM | Report abuse

"These two events would be similar had Republicans blamed crazy Muslims and now Democrats blaming Palin. But Republicans attempted to blame all Muslims..."

Really? Which Republican did that? Quotes, links, please. I remember attention drawn to jihadist doctrine and jihadist preachers. What do you remember?

"Democrats are not blaming all Republicans. They're merely asking those who put crosshairs over congress people be accountable for their language."

So it's all really just Palin and her crosshairs? How powerful she must be! It's impossible to over-estimate how deranged you people are. But keep it up--you do far more damage to yourselves than the Republicans could ever do.

You and MarilynManson (above) should go make a citizens arrest of Palin. The country will thank you.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 2:36 PM | Report abuse

adam62,

You have short-term memory. The Fort Hood shooting took place and then people found out that a mosque was being built a few blocks from Ground Zero. The argument against that building and other mosques was that mosques are a symbol of an evil religion, a religion that promotes hatred and violence.

Even when it was shown that those who lead those mosques were pro-west and have or had helped put muslim terrorists away, those on the right wanted to portray all muslims as subscribing to this type of behavior.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | January 10, 2011 2:41 PM | Report abuse

It's the Palin bulls-eyes, stupid!

Posted by: BBear1 | January 10, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Saying that Palin bears no responsibility is like saying every snowflake in an avalanche is innocent. People seem to be overlooking the fact that one of the shooters obsessions was with words and grammar. Words DO matter and public officials should choose thier words thoughtfully, carefully and respectfully.

Posted by: Natmeister | January 10, 2011 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Vigorous political discourse is a time-honored American tradition started by our contentious founders. The Dems certainly engage in vitriol against their enemies such as "BushHitler". When great issues are being debated, some of the rhetoric will always be over the top, whether it's the war in Iraq or ObamaCare.

It's utterly ridiculous for one side to try to score political points off the acts of a deranged killer. Who cares what the killer's political views are unless he's directly influenced by a movement that urges such massacres, e.g. radical Islam. If Loughner were a registered Democrat or Republican, would that implicate one of our political parties in this atrocity? Of course not. Nor would I blame the post-modernists because Loughner somewhere picked up their obsession about the disconnect between words and meaning.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 3:20 PM | Report abuse

It remains to be seen what this nutcase Loughner was thinking. But Palin is a prime example of the over-the-top political rhetoric that inspires the likes of Loughner and Tim McVeigh. It was Palin who put out ads with cross hairs over the images of Democratic candidates. It was Palin who shoots or beats animals to death on TV. It is really disgusting to see bloggers excusing her excesses, along with those of Michele Bachmann etc.

Posted by: troisieme | January 10, 2011 3:26 PM | Report abuse

It remains to be seen what this nutcase Loughner was thinking. But Palin is a prime example of the over-the-top political rhetoric that inspires the likes of Loughner and Tim McVeigh. It was Palin who put out ads with cross hairs over the images of Democratic candidates. It was Palin who shoots or beats animals to death on TV. It is really disgusting to see bloggers excusing her excesses, along with those of Michele Bachmann etc.
------------
You don't like Palin. I get it. I don't like Pelosi and Reid, and I could Google a long list of stupid, inflammatory comments they've made. But they have no responsibility for the acts of a deranged pothead death cultist whose political ideas, such as they were, were a muddle of Marx, Hitler, 9/11 trutherism, weird syllogisms about grammar, and a belief that marijuana should become our national currency.

You liberals are really disgusting to try to use a horrible event like the Tucson shootings to attack politicians you don't like.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Excellent point, Irishspy.

Charles Krauthammer did write:

"Facing the choice of whether to maintain our dominance or to gradually, deliberately, willingly, and indeed relievedly give it up, we are currently on a course towards the latter. The current liberal ascendancy in the United States--controlling the executive and both houses of Congress, dominating the media and elite culture--has set us on a course for decline. And this is true for both foreign and domestic policies. Indeed, they work synergistically to ensure that outcome."

Sounds pretty explicit. To say the President, Congress and media are "deliberately, willingly" working for decline in "both foreign and domestic policy" is kind of serious.

Looks like Palin and Krauthammer are on the same page, though Palin is more circumspect in limiting her comments to the President and the economy and not including the rest of domestic policy, foreign policy or liberals in Congress and the media in her statement.

Posted by: TD01 | January 10, 2011 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin recklessly uses rhetoric that infers use of guns (crosshares of a gun) and citizen violence to prmote her shallow political and celebrity promotion.

I hope Sarah palin and those like her all end up like Joe Mccarthy from the50's. he was a shallow man with no abilities in the Congress other than to lay baseless claims on people, ruining their lives in the meantime.
In the end. Mccarthy ended up alone with no one listening to his rants.

I urge everyone to just ignore Sarah Palin, I mean really ignore all that she is supposed to be about.

Posted by: jamesangone | January 10, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Palin and all of her right wing nut compadres have a share in the blame for this tragedy. The real people to blame are her fanatic backers; the talking heads like Hannity, Beck, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Coulter, Levin, Malkin, Reagan and others of the loud and boisterous lunatic fringe; those who encouraged and excused the lynch mobsters in last years Congressional Town Hall get togethers...

Posted by: harleyj | January 10, 2011 4:29 PM | Report abuse

If one wants to blame some one for inflammatory comments, how about Obama himself:

"If they bring a knife, WE bring a gun".

If that isn't inflamatory, what is?


BaO is POISON!!!


TBC ~:>{)


Posted by: TheBlackCherokee | January 10, 2011 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Don't let her off the hook. But perhaps it is unfair to single her out. There are many others who have also popisened the political culture in our country. And yes, Liberals are also not clean but I have never heard one of them to encoursge physical harm to those who have a different agenda. The hatred spewed by these people is bound to affect simple and troubled minds. And a person who has ambitions for the highest office in the country should be held to a higher standard than idiots like Beck and Limbaugh.

Posted by: schumann-bonn | January 10, 2011 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Sarah is a good girl basically but is too inexperienced to be president and maybe VP and she shouldn't have quit her first meaningful job.

I am sure she won't be so talkative in the future; at least about cross hairs, reload etc. Maybe she will even quit endorsing people she knows little about.

But she is now rich, so she can laugh all the way to the bank.

But we may have a problem in the future. The Republicans have not put up any candidates I can support. Guess I will have to vote for President Obama.

He is going to have to use veto. Especially when the Republicans try to undo past legislation such as the Health care bill. Hope he has the gumption to do that.

Posted by: LL314 | January 10, 2011 4:44 PM | Report abuse

It's ridiculous to believe that Sarah Palin's comments caused the tragedy in Arizona any more than PRESIDENT OBAMA'S comment "if they bring a knife, then we'll bring a gun" incited the tragedy. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/14/obama-if-they-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-we-bring-a-gun/
Sarah Palin's comments where OBVIOUSLY metaphorical in the same way as President Obama's. There is *not one conservative person who is not mourning the Arizona tragedy.* This should be a time of bringing the country together as Americans in the same way that 9/11 did. Instead, the left is demonizing conservatives and specifically Sarah Palin, all because one man acted out of his own severe mental illness.

Posted by: thinkitthrooooo | January 10, 2011 4:49 PM | Report abuse

How mean of those lefties to point out that putting crosshairs on a legislator's congressional district is not just in bad taste but may have consequences. How totally rude to mention that CONSERVATIVES are the ones advocating 'second amendment solutions' or making people afraid to come out of their houses. How very annoying that some (obviously left wing) people think rhetoric advocating violence is a not very "American." Gosh, and how 'bout those meanies actually pointing out how conservative congressmen don't even disabuse the people trying to delegitimize the president by questioning his citizenship (I take this as "gosh - can there be smart black men who are also citizens?). Boy, those lefties - ratcheting up the rhetoric to point out the facts to folks like you who don't seem to have a clue. Oh - you must think I'm a big Meany too - talking back - you don't even want the left to point out how lives are threatened - how Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, and Rush Limbaugh are egging on those who are already unstable. It sure sounds like they would like someone to 'follow through' - and then they step back and say ‘oh sorry, didn't mean it, just entertainers here, crosshairs doesn't mean they are targets'.
Really girl, what planet do you live on?

Posted by: mmajumda | January 10, 2011 4:50 PM | Report abuse

The blood of a 9 year old girl isn't even dry and the professional Left has to race to make political points, based on no solid evidence whatsoever.

Disgusting.

It reveals who these people really are.

The warped, bitter 20%.

No problem when "The Assassination of George Bush" movie came out.

That was free speech.

Or the rants on MSNBC every night.

But since there's absolutely no evidence this lunatic was motivated by politicsa...just make it up and keep repeating it.

This is why Liberalism was thrown out on it's rear in the election.

Posted by: drjcarlucci | January 10, 2011 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Only Jared Lee Loughner is responsible for killing six & wounding 13. My gosh, how could we ever suggest otherwise? He assumed responsibility w/his admission of guilt before he even left the house.
HOWEVER, make no mistake: the placement of gunsights over 20 Democrat house districts, and, comments such as:
"Don't get mad, just reload," and Sharon Angle's suggestion that her supporters could always resort to "their second Amendment rights" have ratcheted up the rhetoric substantially. The statements of Palin, Angle, & Gabbie Gifford's opponent, when he invited supporters to come & blast away @ a fund raiser against Gifford ... gosh, does this lady Rubin need a road map, to present the notion that leading people to a precipice that is framed in shooting & gun terminology doesn't motivate the weaker minded to consider actually loading a weapon, & extra magazines, for a total of 90 rounds, & going to a mall congressional event ... and going with the intent to kill ... that doesn't travel backwards to the candidates who have brought such notions to the fore?
So Sarah Palin's not part of this? I'm sorry, but Jennifer Rubin's a lame game pundit if that's really what she believes. The Tea Party & people like Palin, who hasn't to my knowledge, made ANY comments about her involvement in such a decompensation of reasonable political rhetoric that may have contributed to this tragedy ... Jennifer Rubin's a dolt.
And, if Rubin really believes that marching to that particular drummer isn't dangerous, just wait: there will be more of the same. There are lots & lots of people w/legitimate mental health problems, who have as many as 18 separate guns ... right here, in this place. One recently died. He was a bona fided paranoid schizophrenic, & he bought that many weapons through "other means" than legitimate gun dealers ... OR ... lied on his applications.
He HAD been hospitalized more than once & he had a regular regimen of anti-psychotic meds to take ... whether he stopped, I'll never know. But, he could if he felt "better than I've ever felt before," as he told me more than once.
Jennifer Rubin's pathetic, & really, for the reasons she gave, plus her infamous website ... so is Sarah Palin. Palin has skipped around leaving her governor's position early. She will NEVER be able to distance herself from her "gunsite website."
Sarah Palin's going to go into the dustbin of history on this one. As she should.

Posted by: zennheadd | January 10, 2011 4:50 PM | Report abuse

There is a reason Clarence Page earned a Pulitzer - his very careful and exact use of the language. And yesterday on Reliable Sources, he said exactly the correct thing about this topic. Sarah Palin, radio talk-show hosts and Tea-Partiers do not incite, provoke or inspire deranged lunatics. They ENABLE them by their actions and language, making it seem appropriate and commonplace for such people to speak and act out whatever they see and hear.
And as Matt Lauer said this morning on the Today Show, "there are no saints in the mainstream media either." From repeated broadcasts very bad behavior and rage at town meetings and even in the congressional chambers, any deranged lunatic might infer that it is the way Americans behave these days.It's a pretty good bet one will get "famous"(or infamous)by behaving badly - or killing someone one disagrees with.

Posted by: vphoebe | January 10, 2011 4:51 PM | Report abuse

There is no one cause for the horrific recent events in Arizona. But, there are public individuals who add to the climate of hostility toward public servants. Cumulatively, they seem to be creating a "heckler's veto." Speaking out, however thoughtfully, now gives a speaker cause for concern and even fear. Such over heated rhetoric stifles free speech. Vilifying, belittling and denigrating public officials and institutions is part of Gov. Palin's approach to communication. She is also the recipient of vilification. Let's hope recent events leads independent middle Americans to shun those who create such division - and seem to revel in doing so.

Posted by: jahysell | January 10, 2011 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Sorry Jennifer, Palin, Bachman, Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, Kyl, and the list goes on and on, have spent the last 2 years filling the airwaves with hateful invective about Obama in particular and Democrats in general. "Second Amendment Remedies", "we came unarmed, this time", Obama as Hitler, "Don't retreat reload", "The people of Minnesota need to be armed and dangerous", etc. These words and images were designed to inflame to motivate their base to get out and vote. The problem is that these images were also seen and heard by unbalanced lunatics like the kid in Arizona, who don't understand the difference.

And you, and the rest of the excuse makers, apologists and right wing spinners who try to blame liberals, or the local sheriff, for calling these people on their hateful rhetoric are part of the problem as well. It's long past time for toning it down, it's time for outright condemnation, and an end to the violent images and rhetoric in politics. Free speech is one thing, but yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, which is what Palin and her ilk do daily, is quite another.

Posted by: pblotto | January 10, 2011 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Defending vitirolic rhethoric based on the absence of proof that it resulted in this violent act or that one, is beside the point. Among civilized peoples, vitoriol is boorish, thuggish and not called for. As Charles P. Pierce has pointed out in his seminal book on the subject, Idiot America, there was a time in this country when only the village idiot could get away with such speech, divorced as it was from reality and non-sensical. Today, he argues, it has been mainstreamed and made acceptable much to our chagrin by the celebrity status of some of those who use the old paranoid style as a political tactic and those, like Jennifer Rubin, who apparently excuse it.

Bad on you, Jennifer and the horse you rode in on.

Posted by: ChickDante | January 10, 2011 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Don't let her off the hook. But perhaps it is unfair to single her out. There are many others who have also popisened the political culture in our country. And yes, Liberals are also not clean but I have never heard one of them to encoursge physical harm to those who have a different agenda. The hatred spewed by these people is bound to affect simple and troubled minds. And a person who has ambitions for the highest office in the country should be held to a higher standard than idiots like Beck and Limbaugh.

Posted by: schumann-bonn
---------
Nonsense. Did you sleep through the Bush years? There was even a film, "The Death of a President", about the assassination of George W. Bush that was aimed at a leftwing audience. The left thought this sort of thing was entirely appropriate.

Rep. Giffords, who supports gun rights and border enforcement and who just voted against Pelosi for speaker, has been attacked with more vitriol by the left than by the right. But there's no indication this psychotic killer Loughner was inspired by either side.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Palin, along with the rest of the Right Wing leaders (that's correct, "leaders") like Beck and Limbaugh and all manner of congressional representatives and senators, shares the blame for the violence resulting from their actions. Make no mistake, rhetoric IS action. And it appears the Right can kill people they don't agree with by inciting violence committed by "unstable" people whom they urge forward on the Right's behalf.

Posted by: Patric2 | January 10, 2011 5:00 PM | Report abuse

People, who are deranged and out of touch with normal civilization, are more inclined to follow radical ideas...or words. The Repubs better start filtering Palin or shut her up in Nome, without a phone. Randall J. Marlowe, Buenos Aires

Posted by: ranjackmarlowegmailcom | January 10, 2011 5:03 PM | Report abuse

"adam62,

You have short-term memory. The Fort Hood shooting took place and then people found out that a mosque was being built a few blocks from Ground Zero. The argument against that building and other mosques was that mosques are a symbol of an evil religion, a religion that promotes hatred and violence.

Even when it was shown that those who lead those mosques were pro-west and have or had helped put muslim terrorists away, those on the right wanted to portray all muslims as subscribing to this type of behavior."

I must say, this is the first time I've seen someone connect the Fort Hood shooting to the Ground Zero Mosque. That's probably because there's no connection. What conservatives were saying about the Fort Hood shooting was not that all Muslims are evil, but, one, that we shouldn't tolerate open and proud jihadists in the US Army and, two, we can't be afraid to point out that someone believes in a murderous ideology for fear of being called racist. And that was it. The Ground Zero Mosque raised a whole different set of issues, and I won't bother engaging your very tendentious representation.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 5:09 PM | Report abuse

My goodness, didn't I see some of the same cross-hair graphics in the 2004 election by left wing organizations on Republican candidates? And what about President Obama referring a couple of weeks ago that Republicans are the ENEMY? Where was the left wing outrage on that remark?

Posted by: chet_chap | January 10, 2011 5:12 PM | Report abuse

My goodness, didn't I see some of the same cross-hair graphics in the 2004 election by left wing organizations on Republican candidates? And what about President Obama referring a couple of weeks ago that Republicans are the ENEMY? Where was the left wing outrage on that remark?

Posted by: chet_chap | January 10, 2011 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Zero evidence that the shooter ever heard any inflamatory campaign rhetoric from Palin? Yes, but evidence that the shooter was engaged to some degree in the politics of the day and likely heard aome of the inflamatory Palin rhetoric. Inflamatory language is often enough to ignite irrational behavior from someone who is unbalanced. Of course we need to wait to see what evidence there is before bligthely dismissing the possibility that Palin's suggestion that we "reload" and "target" those who "hate" America could possibly have any influence on one who is unhinged or a zealot.

Posted by: Renaud21 | January 10, 2011 5:16 PM | Report abuse

The beauty of our political system is that the Lefties can spew forth their demands that Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, etc., etc., be "held accountable," not "let off the hook," etc, etc.--and the rest of us are free to ignore or laugh at them. How angry they are! And, yet, how packaged and stereotyped their anger seems.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 5:17 PM | Report abuse

This article is off-target & irresponsible. Fox News should respond in a responsible manner, or the FCC should take action.

Posted by: quest4truth1 | January 10, 2011 5:22 PM | Report abuse

I think it is pretty apparent at this point that Lougner is insane, that he was probably going to do something like this eventually and that political rhetoric had little or nothing to do with motivating the attack.

That it can not be held directly responsible for this atrocity does NOT however mean that the sort of irresponsible and inflammatory rhetoric too often thrown about by Palin and others is harmless. If we use this horrible tragedy as an opportunity to step back, look at ourselves, think about what we say and what it does to our Republic, our fellow citizens and ourselves, if we can use this discussion to become more civil, rational, open-minded and respectful of one another, then some good might yet come of this horror. If we use this as yet another excuse to call each other juvenile names, use one wrong to 'justify' another, to jump to conclusions and assign to one another the worst of all possible motives, then we will multiply the damage a thousand times over.

There's plenty of blame to go around and it's worse than useless to bicker about who is worse. If we really want things to change, it's up to US. Hate only sells if WE buy.

Please let the politicians and pundits know that you've had enough with the juvenile rancor, the bellicose ranting and the useless invective that enlightens no one and does nothing to forward public discourse. Let them know with your choice of programming. Let them know directly by writing them. Most of all, let them know with your money.

We can't change the world but we can change ourselves.

Posted by: andrew23boyle | January 10, 2011 5:24 PM | Report abuse

you people actually amaze me. this idiot is a leftwing extremist and yet you have done nothing but condem conservatives or moderates talk shows, polititians, etc. You are a bunch of mouth pieces who have no idea what you are screaming about. This man/boy was a LIBERAL. Can you hear me. Look it up, read the TRUTH. Stop assuming. It is a disgrace. When Ft Hood was shot up by an islamic terrorist the media was afraid to use those words they said he was sick, don't jump to conclusions blah blah blah. Yet they and you have done everything you could to try to make you sheep think he was a right wing extremist yet he was the opposit. It amazes me the hypocracy from you liberals. Sarah Palin, Rush, Beck, Hannity et al had nothing to do with this kid. HE WAS A LIBERAL......

Posted by: mmartin3 | January 10, 2011 5:25 PM | Report abuse

This thread is an interesting display of the leftists in this country -- both of their real IGNORANCE of specifics and of their general mental health. They're being vitriolic doesn't even begin to describe this display.


BaO is POISON!!!


TBC ~:>{)


Posted by: TheBlackCherokee | January 10, 2011 5:27 PM | Report abuse

It's funny, but I have NEVER heard anyone on MSNBC make violent threats or encourage viewers to violence towards people they disagreed with Politically. On the other hand, "Fixed" News rarely misses an opportunity to demonize someone, ala Bill O'Reilly's chant, "Tiller, the baby Killer", or Glenn Beck's irrational rants against the President who he believes "hates white people". Sharron Angle's "Second Amendment remedies" and Sarah Palin's "targeting" of political opponents have added fuel to a dangerously out of control firestorm of violent rhetoric from the Right. Armed with half truths and outright lies these people spread their hateful invective for the sole purpose of manufacturing "news". O'Reilly contributed to the death of Dr. Tiller by inflaming the psychotics among us to rise up and use violence in dealing with those with whom they disagree. Words can be weapons in the mouths of those who carelessly speak before they think. Folks on MSNBC retract or correct themselves if they make an error or report something inaccurately. "Fixed" news, evidently, is infallible since they rarely, if ever, do. Since Ronald Reagan's Teflon Presidency, responsibility is something to be avoided at all costs. It seems the Right-Wing are totally covered in Teflon since everything slides right off them. It's time to put away the inflammatory rants and start to work together for the good of all. We have the same goals but they will remain unattainable if we don't.

Posted by: billnbillieskid | January 10, 2011 5:32 PM | Report abuse

It is delicious that someone thinks Governor Palin needs to be defended against the charge of attempted assassination of a Member of Congress! Keep it up. The more the issue is discussed, the more it diminishes Palin's luster. She may not be culpable but she has been publicly embarrassed. Her bad luck to have put a target on someone who ended up shot. Fair or not, she will suffer some consequences. Couldn't happen to a more deserving target (oops, I mean subject -- or is it object?)

Posted by: DEwinginNH | January 10, 2011 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Leftists have wanted either Bush or Cheney dead for the last 10 years. Leftists can say anything. If they are criticized, they yell about freedom of speech. The media rarely has anything to say about leftist hate speech.

Below are some posts from WaPo and one from an article in which the left wants Bush or Cheney to die. There are multiple posts and articles that advocate their death. These are only just a few examples. The leftists are hypocrites:

fslearjet wrote:
I am astonished that this man has survived the number of heart attacks that he has received. My question would be are follows: 1)What is keeping this man alive is it Kryptonite? 2)Isn't the devil ready for this man? 3)Why wasn't this man ever investigated for the immoral and criminal acts that he has knowingly engaged in and had knowledge and consent on? I guess in a moral/mortal human being any individual who had a medical condition like this man would have been dead years ago? 7/15/2010 8:31:15 AM

Parsley1 wrote:
Please God......Make your creation to give Cheney a liberal heart happen. If they put him at the front of the list he's gotta take what they offer. If he doesn't he'll look.....dead.....because he will be if he doesn't take that liberal heart! I see major fundraising in Cheney's extension of life for Obama 2012! Please God?
7/15/2010 6:39:06 AM

B-rod wrote:
I KNEW I should have thrust the wooden stake harder into his heart, that would have killed him for sure. It's all my fault! I should have tried harder to killed that g@ddamn vampire!

Larsonlk wrote:
I didn't bring up any facts in any post, I couldn't care less about what you or any one else believes to be fact. I just think he's a real American Dick and I am tire of seeing his mug show up in the news and I am looking forward to the day when his sorry rear end is history.

Walton1us wrote:
I'm sorry to hear that he is recovering. I hope that he is in a lot of pain. He sure inflicted a lot of pain and suffering on innocent people for his own heartless goals.

Here is the full quote and the context from The Australian newspaper:

“Nobel peace laureate Betty Williams displayed a flash of her feisty Irish spirit yesterday, lashing out at US President George W.Bush during a speech to hundreds of schoolchildren.

Campaigning on the rights of young people at the Earth Dialogues forum, being held in Brisbane, Ms Williams spoke passionately about the deaths of innocent children during wartime, particularly in the Middle East, and lambasted Mr Bush.

"I have a very hard time with this word 'non-violence', because I don't believe that I am non-violent," said Ms Williams, 64.

"Right now, I would love to kill George Bush." Her young audience at the Brisbane City Hall clapped and cheered.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/07/24/nobel-peace-laureate-i-wo_n_25717.html


Posted by: Dodgers1 | January 10, 2011 5:36 PM | Report abuse

If it weren't so sad, it would be comical how the liberals, including many on this blog, are still trying to twist this tragic event into an indictment of those politicians and talk show hosts they hate. The dishonest fools have only a few templates which they try to impose on every event, no matter the particular facts. "Narratives" to them trump facts They haven't had an original thought since Karl Marx.

Newsflash to liberals: Loughner is an addled 9/11 truther pothead, whose inane leftist political views have more in common with yours than with Palin's.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 5:38 PM | Report abuse

blackcherokee wrote regarding an Obama campaign phrase: "If they bring a knife, WE bring a gun". If that isn't inflamatory, what is?
__________________________________________

What is???
How 'bout when candidates invite their supporters to gun ranges, as Rep. Giffords' 2010 opponent Jesse Kelly did. "Get on Target for Victory in November! Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly... we have a horse of a very different color.
Or when TeaBag queen Michele Bachmann exhorts her followers to be "armed and dangerous", metaphor passes into literality.

Fights, war and battle metaphor have long been used in our political discourse. Obama used an attributed movie quote about a fight. He didn't threaten someone by name who had actually brought a real knife to a debate.
Incidentally... if someone were to attack me with a knife and I had a gun, I'd ask him if he regretted his attack as he shut his wild eyes.

Posted by: tojby_2000 | January 10, 2011 5:44 PM | Report abuse

I guess taking a "gun to a knife fight" is not provoking. And should be overlooked.

Posted by: richardch_2 | January 10, 2011 5:44 PM | Report abuse

The level of proof in a Civil action is more likely than not. It is more likely that media in Arizona quoted Sarah Palin's diatribe against her political opposition repeatedly, as an ally against National criticism of Arizona. No other motive has surfaced to account for J.L.'s attack on Rep. Giffords than the repeated targeting with a gunsight of a Palin target,therefore best motive is the public record.

Posted by: naahbob | January 10, 2011 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Oh my. What junk. Really, shouldn't we let the facts come together BEFORE deciding if Palin had an impact here or not?

Posted by: zcezcest1 | January 10, 2011 5:56 PM | Report abuse

blackcherokee wrote regarding an Obama campaign phrase: "If they bring a knife, WE bring a gun". If that isn't inflamatory, what is?
__________________________________________

What is???
How 'bout when candidates invite their supporters to gun ranges, as Rep. Giffords' 2010 opponent Jesse Kelly did. "Get on Target for Victory in November! Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly... we have a horse of a very different color.
Or when TeaBag queen Michele Bachmann exhorts her followers to be "armed and dangerous", metaphor passes into literality.

Fights, war and battle metaphor have long been used in our political discourse. Obama used an attributed movie quote about a fight. He didn't threaten someone by name who had actually brought a real knife to a debate.
Incidentally... if someone were to attack me with a knife and I had a gun, I'd ask him if he regretted his attack as he shut his wild eyes.

Posted by: tojby_2000 | January 10, 2011 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Palin has no right to call for toned down political discourse. She is a coward who throws rocks from the cover of facebook and Hannity love ins on Fox. She hasn't "debated" anyone since the VP debate, which is also staged).

I hope she understands that crosshairs over dem opponents on posters during a debate where windows were shot out and tempers ran very high was utterly stupid. But I dont expect much from her. She's a rube

Posted by: Chops2 | January 10, 2011 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Oh my. What junk. Really, shouldn't we let the facts come together BEFORE deciding if Palin had an impact here or not?

Posted by: zcezcest1
---------
Verdict first, trial later. The verdict is Sarah did it.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 6:07 PM | Report abuse

""When someone sends you proof that they've purchased weapons. Proof that they know where you live. And said that they are looking into purchasing a one-way plane ticket to Alaska and then calls from a cell phone with a 907 number, it's over the line and we need protecting,"

Palin spokesperson on her stalker. How do u like it now Sarah u f#@king gun nut psycho. You like the second amendment so much, well live with the fear

Posted by: Chops2 | January 10, 2011 6:15 PM | Report abuse

This is America and we can blame the hatemongers all we like. People like Limbaugh, Beck, and Palin have thoroughly trashed “truth” itself and spew hateful ignorant rhetoric in all directions simply because they are being paid to do so. You can’t take them to court for it but the court of public opinion has every right, and responsibility, to convict them of their crimes.

Posted by: newsboy3 | January 10, 2011 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Some of the idiots here sound like the NYT:

"It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people."

This is the liberal playbook -- it's "facile" to blame the Tea Party or Republicans for this massacre in the absence of any evidence at all of a connection, but, hey, let's do it anyway because their critique of us is so, you know, unfair.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 6:34 PM | Report abuse

"You can’t take them to court for it but the court of public opinion has every right, and responsibility, to convict them of their crimes."

Yes, but you represent only one particularly shrill and obsessed segment of public opinion. Most Americans will see that "indicting" Palin because of the cross hairs is demented. Which is why I hope you keep it up.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Rubin How can you say don"t blame Palin ? Palin and the others that instill hatred and anger into the hearts of America are definitely to blame.It was not the gunscope target that incited the shooter to do what he did. It was the feeding of the evil parts inside all of us that caused this to happen.So, I blame Palin,Limbaugh,Beck and the rest of the Fox News family for their rhetoric for the past 2 years.

Posted by: truth1013 | January 10, 2011 6:48 PM | Report abuse

To the Wrath of Fools:

"The good people of the United States of America, the true patriots, have finally seen you with your media-painted masks ripped off. They have seen what comes to pass when hate, venom, ignorance and violence goes unchecked and unanswered. You have been exposed, and the fact that it took such an unimaginably horrific act for that exposure to take place only increases the fierceness with which you will be answered. You will be repudiated, not with violence, but with the scorn and rejection you so richly deserve. Spin it as you will, scramble all you like. You are found out, and you have nowhere to hide."

http://www.truth-out.org/the-wrath-fools-an-open-letter-to-far-right66686

This includes you Jennifer.

Posted by: denise4925 | January 10, 2011 6:58 PM | Report abuse

I do not think your article passes the laugh test. It is much the same as I see in my own Commonwealth of VA and their rhetoric.

Posted by: GriffonWHO | January 10, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

The idea that Palin's campaign rhetoric had no bearing on this tragic occurrence is nothing more that turning a blind eye to the obvious. Simply stated: Bulltwiddle!

Posted by: MikeMD210 | January 10, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Excuse me, but if Sarah Palin's rhetoric isn't a significant contributing factor to the exercise of violence against a member of Congress, a Federal judge, and a slew of American citizens exercising their right to communicate with their elected representative, then WHY DID SHE RUSH TO REMOVE THE RIFLE-SIGHT MESSAGE ABOUT TARGETING REP. GIFFORDS AND 19 OTHER DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FROM HER WEBSITE?

When someone yells "fire" in a crowded theater, hoping to foment chaos, and succeeds, they are RESPONSIBLE for the results of their behavior. That is what Sarah Palin and all others who have advocated for target-practice, use-your-guns, exercise-your-Second-Amendment-remedies-when-someone-gets-elected-who-you-don't-agree-with solutions have done: made themselves responsible for the death and mayhem that occurred in Tucson last weekend.

Denying this is so is merely partisan backtracking and excuse-making.

Posted by: marcywrite | January 10, 2011 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Obviously, the Palin organization knew it had a problem following the shootings. Its "gun sight crosshairs" were taken down. Of course, now they are now trying to claim that they were surveyor's symbols. Unfortunately, her "reload" comments don't mesh with that explanation.
She, together with the other talking heads of right and left need to recognize the fact that there are some out there who will take their statements innuendo, and references literally, and act. It is time to tone down the hateful rhetoric, and get back to discussing issues in a thoughtful manner. Unfortunately, Glenn Beck, and others like him who share the same narrow black or white view of our Nation's problems would then be out of a job. As likable as she is, Ms. Palin has exactly this very same problem. She is not able to see shades of gray in issues, only black or white.

Posted by: atc333 | January 10, 2011 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Yes, but you represent only one particularly shrill and obsessed segment of public opinion. Most Americans will see that "indicting" Palin because of the cross hairs is demented. Which is why I hope you keep it up.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 6:35 PM | Report abuse
______________________________________________________________________________________
Unfortunately for Sarah and her ilk, crosshairs are not all that we have, that would blame her and her cohorts, Beck, Rush and Faux News.

Posted by: denise4925 | January 10, 2011 7:08 PM | Report abuse

More of Sarah's vitriol before she scrubs this from her FB page.

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2011/01/09/sarah-palin-shoot-with-accuracy-aim-high-and-remember-it-takes-blood-sweat-and-tears-to-win/

Posted by: denise4925 | January 10, 2011 7:12 PM | Report abuse

", I will repeat:Palin's campaign rhetoric is not in any way responsible for the horrific Arizona shooting, "

repeat it all you want , you're wrong.

Just like Al Sadr promotes violence with his rhetoric , so does palin and beck and limbaugh with theirs

Posted by: newagent99 | January 10, 2011 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Sorry Jennifer but you would not be so quick to discount Palin's guilt if it was you in her crosshairs.

Posted by: pnwmainah1 | January 10, 2011 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Jennifer, this poor misguided person seems unable to separate the words of a sentence in order to make sense of his babbles about the government. Would any rational human not think that with his scrambled thinking that he could/would possibly get all mixed up after listening to a firehose full of extreme right wing errata? I have personal experience dealing with two adjudged schizophrenics who acted out in a similar way and believe that this guy will be similarly adjudged by the law; however, this will not halt or slow the Savages, Limbaughs or Palins with their extremist views of our nation. Somehow we have to get this rhetoric cooled down either by common courtesy or by rule of law. Which would you like? Frankly, I am ready for some changes in free speach rules. I dont like to see innocent people sacrificed either to babbling idiots or screeching idiosynchratic, narcissistic would be politicians. Americans should insist on a cooler politic.

Posted by: JLF0425 | January 10, 2011 8:10 PM | Report abuse

Let's see; Quotes from your President in 2008,2009 ,2010; !.] if they bring a knife we will bring a gun 2.] go out there and 'GET IN THOSE CONSERVATIVES FACES' 3.] If the hispanics do not PUNISH "THEIR ENEMIES" AND REWARD THEIR FRIENDS WE WILL LOSE THIS ELECTION. yOU LIBS are really playing a very dangerous game with the American people; your first assumption is that we are stupid like you, wrong; secondly ,because you listen to and believe the media phonies you think conservatives are uninformed, wrong; because you think you are superior to the "unwashed masses" [sic] Katie Couric or who ever; you can beat down on us, wrong, because you think you went to college and we did not [your assumption is incorrect] you can belittle us; Western Illinois University is not HAAARVARD or YAle but it is a very respected university and I will match knowledge of our national problems everyday with any of you;; which I do regularly. We grow your food and build your cars and make your clothes and you only know how to BUY; NOT MAKE anything.

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 10, 2011 8:11 PM | Report abuse

There is no way of knowing for sure if the constant use of shooting metaphors and the putting of gun sights on a map of opponents' Congressional districts.

If the constant repetition of catch phrases and select visual imagery didn't have an impact on the minds of at least some people, then why do businesses spend millions of dollars on advertising?

If words couldn't cause pain, then why are their laws against slander and libel?

Posted by: laSerenissima2003 | January 10, 2011 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin has killed no one;; but wasn't there a Kennedy who drove his car into a creek and a young woman drowned. Was that Teddy murdering MARY JO? LET THE ONE WHO HAS NO SIN,CAST THE FIRST STONE.

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 10, 2011 8:21 PM | Report abuse

I am in awe at the ongoing stream of vicious craziness from the Left. Please, oh please let it spill over continually into the media!

"Unfortunately for Sarah and her ilk, crosshairs are not all that we have, that would blame her and her cohorts, Beck, Rush and Faux News."

Any observer other than the ideology-intoxicated can see that you have nothing on any of these "suspects" (enemies? targets!). In the whole series of diatribes, in comments on this and other posts on the shooting, not a single one of you has noted a single instance of anyone encouraging anyone to commit violence. Not a single one. You all fancy yourselves ideological meteorologists, analyzing the "climate," and suggesting vague patterns of causation by which this shooter was affected--but there is really nothing. All the guns & battle metaphors are just political discourse--everyone in politics speaks of "gathering their troops," the "decisive battle," the other side's "soft underbelly," etc. Conservative politicians, for whose constituencies gun rights are a central concern will of course tend towards such metaphors; while the left, heavy with self-styled intellectuals are more likely to diagnose their opponents as "retarded," "sick," "fearful of others," etc., all suggesting the need for supervision and less freedom.

I now feel completely free saying this because I know nothing could stop you from this continual invective: it's who you are, you're like Pavlovian dogs who smell another Oklahoma City (demagogued successfully by Clinton) and will create another Wellstone's funeral. Have at it!

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 8:29 PM | Report abuse

117 comments about someone who is not running for President and who will probably never hold national public office.

What a gigantic waste of time!

Posted by: 54465446 | January 10, 2011 8:32 PM | Report abuse

"There is zero evidence so far"

As always, evidence is in the mind of the beholder. But in handing down your edict above, you trivialize all of us who immediately saw the connection, as if we are stupid.

Maybe you should reconsider.

Posted by: JEP07 | January 10, 2011 8:39 PM | Report abuse

How does Jennifer know that Palin's and the Tea party's rhetoric was not responsible? Truth is nobody knows, so she is no more in a position to say definitely NO, as is anyone else in a position to say definitely YES.
She tries a diversionary tactic by bringing up Palin's statement on the economy - Nice try Jennifer! The economy is less unsavoury than shootings and death.
IT'S TIME THE UNSAVOURY AND IRRESPONSIBLE RHETORIC STOPS

Posted by: Jenny21 | January 10, 2011 9:00 PM | Report abuse

The leftists are in a feeding frenzy because Palin used an election map with bull's eyes on a number of locations, one of which was Rep. Gifford's district. Ergo Palin created the climate for this horrible attack by a psychotic. Loughner's not the only one who's delusional.

Posted by: eoniii | January 10, 2011 9:18 PM | Report abuse

"How does Jennifer know that Palin's and the Tea party's rhetoric was not responsible? Truth is nobody knows, so she is no more in a position to say definitely NO, as is anyone else in a position to say definitely YES."

I think witches have been burned on a stronger evidentiary basis than this.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 9:33 PM | Report abuse

I agree with mustangs79. The point is not whether Palin incited this particular lunatic. The point is that she's part of the system of destruction, dishonesty and misinformation around which violent acts can be nurtured. The Republicans do this in general, but she is the Queen of Mean and is hardly ever held accountable for her mendacity and hypocrisy on a range of issues. I'd like to see her and the Republicans stop with the hyperbole that only fosters misinformation - death tax, death panels, job killing health care. Great tragic theater but none of it close to the truth.

Posted by: YTYT | January 10, 2011 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone think the violent rhetoric and images of Sarah Palin does NOT influence the mentally unstable?
Can anyone seriously argue that Palin is NOT personally responsible for what comes out of her mouth? Another apologist for the party of everyone else's personal responsibility except their own.

Posted by: fishman2 | January 10, 2011 10:06 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone think the violent rhetoric and images of Sarah Palin does NOT influence the mentally unstable?
Can anyone seriously argue that Palin is NOT personally responsible for what comes out of her mouth? Another apologist for the party of everyone else's personal responsibility except their own.

Posted by: fishman2 | January 10, 2011 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Whether or not Loughner was a follower of Palin; he almost certainly watched a LOT of ugly attack ads on TV that portrayed Gillford as an evil threat to liberty.

I think we should also hold the various political organizations that aired these ads, their (often anonymous) donors, and the Supreme Court's ruling that unleashed the deluge of negative advertising.

Palin is not blameless - but, she is but a small cog in the machine of negativism and hatred that fuels the problem.

Posted by: koygdb1 | January 10, 2011 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Palin is too guilty of disasterous rhetoric on an on-going basis; until now she is totally quiet because in her heart she knows that her mouth has run out: crosshairs, don't retreat reload. Not only Palin, but Baugman, Sharon Angle, FIX News and the list of Tea Baggers Republicans go on. Further, Boehner and McConnell need to resort their priority list - no president Obama should NOT be their first in trying to make him a one termer - and show leadership and integrity by stepping out and saying president Obama is a citizen of USA and that he (president) has move us forward positively with just 2 short years. They need to know that majority of the people do NOT want healthcare reform repelled.

Posted by: netstoy | January 10, 2011 10:21 PM | Report abuse

"Does anyone think the violent rhetoric and images of Sarah Palin does NOT influence the mentally unstable?
Can anyone seriously argue that Palin is NOT personally responsible for what comes out of her mouth? Another apologist for the party of everyone else's personal responsibility except their own."

First, believing that Palin's "rhetoric and images influence the mentally unstable" is on a par with believing that aliens control our minds through electrodes they place in our brains while we sleep. Second, of course one has to accept that she is responsible for what comes out of her mouth--the disagreement comes in when we assess that outflow. I consider Palin to be one of the most responsible figures on the right, and I admire her tremendously--she has been the only Republican who, from the start, and relentlessly, has opposed and exposed Obama's and the Democrat's agenda. She never for a minute (as far as I can tell) wondered whether he was too popular to oppose, or compromise should be sought. She went after him from the beginning and was right from the beginning--and has been brave enough to accept all the hatred we see here--and even seems to accept it with pretty good cheer and humor towards her opponents.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 10:21 PM | Report abuse

There is evidence that Democrats used the "target" maps in 2008. What's wrong with you people? Americans use to be fair minded. Quit listening to the far left pundits like Paul Krugman, Chris Matthews, etc. They are hate filled people who are losing the argument with the American people as to what kind of country they want. We reject liberalism. Get over it.

Posted by: Jackets | January 10, 2011 10:23 PM | Report abuse

And there is NO far left hate filled rhetoric, right? Wrong. We hear it everyday ie Dick Durbin today. I sincerely believe the far left are evil people.

Posted by: Jackets | January 10, 2011 10:25 PM | Report abuse

"Further, Boehner and McConnell need to resort their priority list - no president Obama should NOT be their first in trying to make him a one termer - and show leadership and integrity by stepping out and saying president Obama is a citizen of USA and that he (president) has move us forward positively with just 2 short years. They need to know that majority of the people do NOT want healthcare reform repelled."

HAHAHAHA... Yes, the Republicans should repudiate the voters who gave them a huge majority because a Congresswoman was shot by a lunatic. Wow, you guys are working on all cylinders today. Great stuff!

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 10:39 PM | Report abuse

I am a fervant Dem and think that the language Palin used was obviously symbolic. The sad act yesterday was in no way envisioned by her campaign when they used cross hair targets. That said, there are many, many, more civil and responsible ways to talk about politics, etc and Palin, as the rest of us, should be aware of this.

Posted by: cadam72 | January 10, 2011 10:42 PM | Report abuse

As I was panning down I say some urban idiot saying some of us are LESS CIVILIZED; are you shi--g me; come on down here where I live you city slicker puke and I will shove my best dog bone up your pimpled a--. Fu--g urban idiots, you city sh--s can not even grow your own food.

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 10, 2011 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama and his minions have engaged in inflammatory rhetoric for [2] years; obama is an urban ghetto pimp and his old lady is trying to grow a garden; hah what was it POT.
tHE LEFTIES ARE COOKED AND LIKE THE FROG THEY JUST DO NOT FEEL IT YET.

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 10, 2011 11:00 PM | Report abuse

hAVE SOME OF YOU POSTERS DONE ANY RESEARCH OR AWARENESS TRAINING PRIOR TO GOING PUBLIC? he is a card carrying democrap and is a devout leftest; pot smoking devil worshiping nut who has been talking to her and attending her meetings for [2] years; for cripes sake get up to speed or else go smoke a joint.

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 10, 2011 11:05 PM | Report abuse

To TheBlackCherokee, Nobama11 and anyone else misquoting President Obama: You need to cite the President's quote about knives and guns IN CONTEXT. He was talking about this nation's ENEMIES, not its own citizens. There's a world of difference between that and an American attempting to assassinate one of our own Congressional Representatives, and successfully assassinating a Federal judge and five other innocents. Your analogy is ridiculous on its face.

Adam62...if you think Sarah Palin is in the least bit "responsible," you're a fool. And Nobama11: your most recent posts clarify just what you are: a racist who will believe anything the right spews in an attempt to justify your bigotry.

Posted by: marcywrite | January 10, 2011 11:18 PM | Report abuse

"You need to cite the President's quote about knives and guns IN CONTEXT. He was talking about this nation's ENEMIES, not its own citizens."

You lie (you do know about the internet, don't you?)--he was referring to Republicans. Maybe you're not lying, though--the alternative is that you see the Republicans as this nation's enemies.

"There's a world of difference between that and an American attempting to assassinate one of our own Congressional Representatives, and successfully assassinating a Federal judge and five other innocents. Your analogy is ridiculous on its face."

But I thought the whole point of this leftist temper tantrum was the connection between words and deeds. Now you say there's no connection after all. Well, never mind then.

Posted by: adam62 | January 10, 2011 11:29 PM | Report abuse

If we don't blame Mrs. Hit List then who? If it is illegal to yell fire in a crowded movie then it is illegal to tell a deranged person to go shoot your congresswoman.

Posted by: SanchosR | January 10, 2011 11:59 PM | Report abuse

Who was he talking about when he said; " if the hispanics do not punish their enemies and reward their friends we will lose this election?

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 11, 2011 12:00 AM | Report abuse

who was he talking about when he was trying to push obama acare when he said;; " go out and get in their faces"?

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 11, 2011 12:03 AM | Report abuse

The posters here do not do very good research.

Palin was not the first to use cross-hairs over House Districts. The Democrats used the same gimmick in 2004 and also used the term and symbol, "bullseye."

Palin was not even the first in the 2010 election. Guess who targeted Giffords in the Democratic Primary in 2010 -- the far left's friend, Kos.

Come on, guys, get your research straight.

Posted by: RonKH | January 11, 2011 5:32 AM | Report abuse

As a rule of thumb, the Obama administration does not have unintended consequences. By and large, they are all very much intended.

Posted by: IsraelP | January 11, 2011 7:22 AM | Report abuse

"If it is illegal to yell fire in a crowded movie then it is illegal to tell a deranged person to go shoot your congresswoman."

If it's illegal to yell (falsely) fire in a crowded movie, and should be illegal to tell a deranged person to go shoot your congresswoman, then it should be just as illegal to tell, falsely, all the deranged people out there that someone has told anyone to shoot someone. Ergo, SanchosR, you and all your fellow lefties should be rounded up as a public menace immediately.

Posted by: adam62 | January 11, 2011 7:28 AM | Report abuse

why is sister sarah always the victim? she's not.if she doesn't want to take her share of the responsibility she should be quiet and get out of the political discourse. with discourse comes responsibility. the people who were shot and killed/wounded are the victims. not sister sarah. she should rethink her rhetoric and speak as an adult not as an unintelligent overindulged child.

Posted by: jmurray2696 | January 11, 2011 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Anybody who truly believes that Sarah Palin doesn't bear at least some responsibility for what happened to Tuscon is as nutty as the guy who pulled the trigger, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: alfalfabill | January 11, 2011 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Any attempt to assign any responsibility for this shooting to Palin or any other conservative is nothing short of blood libel--no different from medieval claims that the Jews were poisoning the well. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but you can be sure that any attempt to proceed with this blood libel will be met with a Dreyfusard style response by conservatives. Every last lie and smear will be remembered, dissected, and repeated. You will escalate the rhetoric considerably--I suspect that's what you all really want, but I don't think you'll like it when you see it. People will be no more patient with your attempts to destroy the country now than they were before.

Posted by: adam62 | January 11, 2011 10:05 AM | Report abuse

On Palin, how can anyone feel sympathy for the woman. She is the most venal person. She can dish it out but she cannot take it. Obama serves on a community board pro bono and someone else on that board was convicted of a terrible act 40 years ago, and he’s “palling around with terrorists”. Michelle Obama tries to highlight children’s obesity, and Palin mocks her. The Health Care bill tries to provide end of life counseling, and its “Death Panels.”. Palin says Obama is trying to “intentionally weaken” the US economy. Has there ever been a more spiteful, negative, vindictive, unqualified person who has risen this high in US politics? It has nothing to do with her being conservative, she’s just terrible. She doesn’t make any arguments, she just throws cheap bombs from a twitter account. So if people criticize her for putting a bulls-eye on a map when one of those people gets shot (and her spokesperson makes a pathetic lie to say it was a “surveyor’s symbol”), even if it is unfair she is getting a very small sip of her own poisonous medicine.

Posted by: spencerj7 | January 11, 2011 12:19 PM | Report abuse

The author offers a false alternative. There is absolutely no reason a person can't simultaneously be a lunatic AND a Palin sympathizer or political supporter.

There is every indication that THIS lunatic WAS indeed motivated by issues near and dear to Ms Palin and the Tea Party, and intended to commit an assassination (his own words) of a political leader of the opposition.

Similarly, the Fort Hood shooter was apparently both a lunatic and an Islamic radical... and despite Jennifer Rubin's effort to put words in the mouths of HER political opposition, I've never heard ANYONE claim otherwise.

Lunacy and exaggerated devotion to some cause... political, religious or otherwise... often go hand-in-hand... mental illness is often expressed through such views.

Use of belligerent metaphors (ie "we're locked and loaded", posters with rifle crosshairs on opposition candidates, etc) certainly seems likely to risk feeding into the problems of such people. Even though a causal relationship might not be definitively proven, a political campaign that relies on such rhetoric is just asking for trouble.

Posted by: Iconoblaster | January 11, 2011 12:31 PM | Report abuse

All you need to do is push the right button for a psycho to do their evil work and that evil racist witch Sara Palin did it and you dont have proof that what that evil witch said was not the trigger.
Hannit,limbaugh,oreilly.Boostein and that ann coulter are imbecile,liar,arrogant,racist who provoke the enemy of this great country more determine to hit us again.these five evil should not be allowed public audience.These four and that sp are simply downright evil.

Posted by: bloodytruth | January 11, 2011 1:26 PM | Report abuse

We should be clear that the rhetorical vitriol of Palin, Beck, Limbaugh and et al. was neither a necessary nor sufficient cause for Saturday’s massacre.

Not a necessary cause since crazies can find their way to their madness without one word of rhetorical vitriol from us.

Not a sufficient cause since this rhetorical vitriol did not “make Jared Loughner do it.”

Trying to come up with some credible scenario whereby the rhetorical vitriol somehow “caused” Saturday’s massacre can only lead to inappropriate analysis and misdirected criticism.

Ccausality is simply not the real question. We should not ask ourselves how this rhetorical vitriol can somehow be made ‘responsible for” Saturday’s massacre.

This guy was crazy enough that his own mind was both the necessary and the sufficient cause for his acts.

Loughner is the wrong focus for our reflection. Lave him to the Justice system.

Still, even without blaming words as causes, we should feel discomfort or outrage maybe tinged with guilt.

Despite the disconnect between Loughner’s acts and the rhetorical vitriol, those engaged in such rhetorical vitriol are associating with a linguistic worldview -- a world of language, in which Jared Loughner would FEEL RIGHT AT HOME.

Our hostility to this rhetorical vitriol is about us, not about him. About our willingness to create this rhetorical world, not about his actions so in tune with the world our words have created.

In that world, it somehow makes sense for a major party candidate for US Senate to talk about a possible resort to "Second Amendment remedies,” about how some will feel that they ‘have to’ use guns instead of votes, bullets instead of ballots.

When we find that the crazies can live comfortably in the linguistic world we have created, we should recoil in discomfort, horror, outrage, guilt.

We should not have entered that world by our language. We should not preen on that language, we should not make money off that vitriol, we should not gain political power by that kind of language.

We were wrong not because we “caused” massacres by crazy people, but because we joined ourselves with them and become part of their world.

We can disagree with each other deeply, passionately, even angrily – but we should not create a rhetoric that makes the other our enemy – the other side must be seen as much concerned about creating a just and workable society as we are, at least until this or that person on the other side actually clearly shows himself not to be trying to build a just and workable society.

We are in this together. A really profound thought. We must talk as if all of us, Republican and Democrat, liberal, progressive and conservative, or even just moderate or centrist, young, old, gay, straight, Catholic, Protestant, Jew, Muslim, agnostic or atheist, are in this together.

For indeed we are all in a common quest to form a more perfect union – just what the Constitution says!

Posted by: stvmcclure | January 11, 2011 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Awsome comments stvmcclure. You nailed it.

Posted by: Ruol | January 11, 2011 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Steve Mcclure you hit it buddy "BULLS EYE" we as a citizen of this country should all join hands and become one and protect this country with our lives not incite hatred like those evil (hannity,oreilly,coulter and now palin)does.I love USA and I will die to protect this great country but our imbecile politicians are leading us straight to hell.This great country is bankrupt and the cause is that imbecile Bush for starting two wars and killings millions.I pray to God not to punish USA punish those imbecile who is resposible.

Posted by: bloodytruth | January 12, 2011 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Black GOP chairman resigns due to terrorist threats from Tea Party:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/ahwatukee/articles/2011/01/11/20110111gabrielle-giffords-arizona-shooting-resignations.html#ixzz1AqMYTq70

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | January 12, 2011 6:30 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company