“Have you no sense of decency at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”
That quote is from Joseph Welch, the lead counsel for the United States Army while it was under investigation by Joseph McCarthy's Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations for Communist activities delivered to McCarthy in June of 1954, but it could also apply to former half-term Alaska Governor Sarah Palin after she broke her silence on Wednesday over the shooting on Sunday of Democratic U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona that killed six people and wounded 13 others by a mentally disturbed college student with anti-government views.
To quote Palin, she didn't retreat, she reloaded and released a statement, of course, on her Facebook page, saying, “But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”
She also refused, again, to take any responsibility for the possible harm her violent rhetoric and images could provoke in someone who is unbalanced. While she personally probingly didn’t have any effect on the shooter, the violent and hateful anti-government rhetoric from the right most likely did.
Giffords had been targeted by Palin’s PAC after Giffords voted for health insurance reform. Palin had circulated a "hit list" – scrubbed from her web site immediately after the shooting - of political targets, which included Giffords. A map had been circulated with target crosshairs placed over Giffords’ district and others.
Giffords herself had expressed concern over Palin’s actions after her office was vandalized after the health insurance vote last March.
In the seven and a half minutes video Palin released, instead of talking responsibility for her actions, Palin acted as if she was a victim. I would just once like see her submit to an actual interview with a real journalist.
52 comments:
Everything is about Sarah. This tragedy is just another chance for Sarah to talk about Sarah...
The real question is does Sarah ever use the "Don't Retreat! -Reload!" line again?
Sarah Palin didn't say anything for three days but the liberal media talked about her and of course tried to blame her for this shooting.
Yet, within two days Bernie Sanders was fundraising using the shooting for his fundraising.
But then, he's a socialist democrat, so it's okay for him.
First of all, anonymous coward, there is no such thing as the “liberal media,” other than liberal bloggers.
Second, Palin should have been there on day one taking some responsibility and showing some leadership , but she did have her mouthpiece issue a statement less than 24 hours after the shooting denying the “campaign against the U.S. Health Reform encourages violence.”
When she did finally open her trap, she did it on Facebook where no one could ask a follow up question or challenge her lies. Very brave and presidential of her. Like I have said quite a few times, no one is blaming her specifically for this shooting, but I wonder if the right is ever going to take some responsibility for the hateful shit they spew that has given us Oklahoma City, the murder of doctors to this guy.
I don’t see how Bernie Sanders pointing out that Republican need to be stopped – at the ballot box not through a Second Amendment remedy – promotes violence against Republicans.
Again, anonymous coward, there is no such thing as a Socialist Democrat in the United States and that is just a false, Republican smear.
Once again, anonymous coward, I am still waiting for you to back up your outrageous lie that we were “nearly shoulder to shoulder once.”
You are a idiot if you believe this..
More great debate from the right; your ridiculous comment says it all.
Now I know youre a fake. I quote "POSSIBLE HARM" this is so so so so so so so so soooooooo stupid. This kid planned on attacking the congresswoman since 2007. Most people never heard of Palin until 2008. Stop blaming the right. If he was a right wing fanatic why did he hate Bush so much? Again, stop blaming the right when the left is just as much to blame. The kid POSSIBLY listened to Air America nonstop and didnt like any DINO's much like I dont like RINO's.
Again LOL you wrote POSSIBLE harm, referring to Palins words.
If they bring a knife to the fight, we're going to bring a gun. - Pres Obama. Yeah that kid brought a gun. Thanks Mr. President for your words possbily causing harm. See how easy it is to do what you do?
Ive learned every post you make doesnt have concrete anything to back them up. Well most posts, your local stuff in Detroit I dont know about.
I don’t recall saying Palin was the main reason for this shooting or even responsible, but it’s kind of funny that the person who was shot expressed concern that Palin’s actions put her in danger, yet it does not even cause her to take any responsibility for her violent rhetoric. The “kid “may have “planned on attacking the congresswoman since 2007, but he pulled the trigger in 2011.
I will continue to blame the right because their bullshit has spawned violence. I would say he is anti-government, and like I said when this teabagger shit cropped up, I heard the same BS back in 1995.
If the target on Giffords district didn’t have anything to do with the shooting, then whey did she take it down right after the shooting? Keith Oberman said he would tone it down, which I thought was a mistake because what he was saying was not causing people to commit violence, and he suspended his “Worst Person” segment.
What did Palin do? Agree to tone it down just in case? No, she “didn’t retreat she re-loaded.” Great compassion.
Oh, you really think a line from the movie “The Untouchables” caused anyone to commit violence? The only problem with that: the President’s words, or liberal’s, have not led to any harm or violence.
are you an unsincere blogger? it appears yes. again you say the left is so innocent and never does wrong and leading people to violence. http://www.uncoverage.net/2010/03/the-lefts-violent-attacks-on-conservatives/
every piece of info you put out there can be counterpointed and you blow it off. i love this.
No, I’m very sincere, and the fact remains the anti-government rhetoric from the right has again led to violence. I don’t ever recall saying “the left is so innocent and never does wrong.” In fact I know I never said it. But what Democrats and liberals have said has never led to violence, nor have we advocated gun violence if we lose at the ballot box like some teabagges have.
Once again you have not provided any reliable proof to back up your position.
I think its your other blame palin piece from a week ago, but you were in the dark because you were very involved from 2000-2008 and didnt see what Im claiming. A few more examples and thanks to John Hawkins:
Since Jared Lee Loughner went on his rampage in Tucson, we've been treated to perfectly ridiculous liberal howling about "violent rhetoric." The reason it's "perfectly ridiculous" is that “liberals being liberals," they've tackled the whole debate in such a politically correct manner that it makes the debate laughable.
According to liberals, what words supposedly incite violence? Words like "targeting," "locked and loaded," "crossfire," "job killing," "double barrel," etc. In other words, it's not people actually calling for violence; it's commonly used phrases -- that have long been used to describe politics -- that cause bloodshed by lathering up maniacs. Of course, only a complete moron could believe this – and, yes, if you believe this, I mean you personally are a moron.
Of course, even most liberals aren't this stupid. So, they've latched on to this theory for two reasons. The first is sheer opportunism. They're going to ignore the countless times their side has used words like "job killing" and "targeted" and they're going to pretend that only conservatives do this. This shows they're hypocritical and have no intellectual honesty. But, that's just par for the course for the professional Left.
However, the other reason is more sinister: Liberals commonly say things that, if they really believe the words that are coming out of their mouths, would lead to political violence. Let's talk about just a few examples.
BushHitler: Calling George Bush "Hitler" and Republicans "Nazis" became such a regular occurrence that it became jejune during the Bush years. Whether it was
Sandra Bernhard saying, "The real terrorist threats are George W. Bush and his band of brown-shirted thugs" or
Michael Moore,
"The Patriot Act is the first step. "Mein Kampf" -- "Mein Kampf" was written long before Hitler came to power. And if the people of Germany had done something early on to stop these early signs, when the right-wing, when the extremists such as yourself, decide that this is the way to go, if people don't speak up against this, you end up with something like they had in Germany. I don't want to get to that point."
If you could go back in time, before Hitler came to power, would it be immoral to kill him? People like Michael Moore, Sandra Bernhard and the rest of the professional Left were hoping someone would say "no" all during the Bush years.
Once again, no liberal or Democrat has committed an act of violence because of violent rhetoric coming from liberals or Democrats. Unfortunately, you can’t say the same thing, at least without lying.
the discovery channel shooter. the person to allegedly have killed jfk was a socialist. socialists vote democrat. there are 2 people.
kevin, do you know who invented the idea of bullseyes and targeting opposing politicians? do you? please tell me you do. once you know, this whol argument will be stemmed to that one person and you can blame that one person. so do you know?
What the hell are you talking about? Who is the “the discovery channel shooter?” I don’t know who the “person to allegedly have killed jfk(sic) was.” The anti-JFK hate from the right, especially in Dallas, was almost as bad as it was for President Obama today.
By the way, Socialists vote Socialist because there is a Socialist Party in the U.S.
I don’t know or care who invented the idea of bull’s eyes because it’s irrelevant. The fact is that Palin used it coupled with violent gun rhetoric like “don’t retreat reload” and the person shot in the head herself expressed concern for her safety because of it after her office was attacked because she voted for health insurance reform.
ha, bob beckel. democrat. he is the father of the bullseye movement. it all starts with him.
but again, you just want to try to nail palin for everything when she had nothing to do with anything.
typical liberal, blame everyone else for their own problems.
discovery channel shooter? for real? you might be the least informered blogger ever. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/ now where would he get ideas like man is killing the planet? answer algore and the whacko enviro groups.
now youre going to try to turn it around saying conservatives dont care about the environment, which we know is complete BS so use something else.
thanks kevin for letting me show you something, even though its probably conservatives making things up on msnbc.
Sorry, I’m not buying it. Even if that were true, he, nor Democrats or liberals, ever preached the kind of hate and violence coming from the right the last two years. Not only that, tell me what Republican had his office attacked after a vote the right has been putting out lies about for the past two years then is shot in the head after Bob Beckkel put a bulls eye over their district because they had to be taken out and the victim expressed concern when they did it.
No, I’m not the “ least informered (sic) blogger ever,” nor am I the least informed blogger ever. Please give me an example of the violent rhetoric Al Gore put out against conservatives and Republicans, and what conservatives and Republicans got shot or attacked because if it.
Conservatives don’t care about the environment, at least those in power. That’s just a fact.
im not buying your premise either, that republicans are influencing people to violence.
blameless libs always no matter what i am sure, my bad.
yes you are uninformed, some other person and myself have given you numerous stories and links about violent libs and every one of them you poo poo. your responses are complete poppycock I hope i spelled that correctly for you.
now we have dems onthe house floor calling repubs nazi's in addtion to what dick durban said. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/01/abc-news-jonathan-karl-reports-the-newfound-civility-didnt-last-long-political-rhetoric-in-congress-doesnt-get-much.html#tp
No he didn’t. I don’t like the comparison, but he was right about the GOP strategy because I have seen it tine after time: if you tell a lie often enough people start to believe it. Are you saying a Republican has never called a Democrat a Nazi?
Once again I’ll ask the question you continue to ignore: What exactly is a Second Amendment solution teabaggers have been pushing?
Sorry, neither you nor anonymous coward have proved you arguments, and speech from Democrats and liberals have never led a Democrat or a liberal to shoot or murder a Republican or a conservative.
a solution to the 2nd ammendment? you lost me. solution to it for what? i dont remember that question being posed, either way, please elaborate.
and as for violence what verbage has led to a republican or conservative to shoot or kill a lib/dem? because its been proven in your own words that palin didnt push this kid over the top to shoot up arizona.
Of course I lost you.
I’ll try and use smaller words.
What is the Second Amendment solution that teabaggers are pushing?
Do you understand?
You’re putting words in my mouth. I never said Palin’s hateful violent rhetoric did not "push this kid over the top” to try and assassinate a Palin target and murder innocent bystanders in the process. Who knows exactly what leads an unhinged mind to take that antigovernment bullshit to heart.
But again, words have consequences.
you imply palin by saying possible harm and have her bullseyes up.
i dont know what 2nd ammendment solution the tea partiers are pushing. again, you need to elaborate further.
thats like me saying, im thinking about getting a new car. someone asks, what style brand etc are you looking for. so what in relation to the 2nd ammendment are you referring to?
“Elaborate further?” Are you playing dumb or are you really dumb?
funny you say that? being a non tea party member, i dont know what solution you are referring to. and you not knowing about the discovery channel shooter is laughable, that was all over the news. so please, elaborate further. i dont read all your blogs, so if you discussed it earlier please shed some light on it for me.
I just don’t believe someone can be that dumb. So, you’re not just playing dumb.
I only have one blog. What is the problem with forgetting about another shooting? I don’t see what is so special about this one. Do you know how many gun deaths occur each year in this country? The answer is more than 87,000.
Try this: Google the term. You can do that, right.
hahaha you still cant elaborate. so you think the tea party should have a solution to gun control? gotcha, now youre elaborating even though i have to dig it out of you.
i vote, ban cars as more auto related deaths happen than cars. and then ban foods that cause heart attacks because thats murder as well, just slowly. and nicotine producrts and abortions and anything that pollutes (so no electric anymore or computers or e-wate) becausethat kills over time too. every person must excercise all the time and only eat fruits and veggies. this can go on and on and on.
it is true, guns dont kill people, people kill people. havent you noticed that the cities with the highest murder rates have the strictest gun controls? chicago for example always leads that pack. funny how that works.
thanks for again puting your foot in your mouth because you cant elaborate and proven wrong often and refuse to believe it. its quite awesome. ill bet anonymous loves it more than me.
so since you have to name call, that means you lost the argument. its a last resort in most peoples arsenal. thanks again for the laughs kevhead.
I Just cannot believe anyone can be that stupid. Teabagger Senate candidate Sharon Angle – among others - said that if they don’t win at the ballot box they should look for Second Amendment solutions.
My questions is, what exactly is a Second Amendment solution” I think we saw one in Arizona.
That’s not name calling, that’s the frustration of trying to get through to an idiot.
haha durrrr.
seriously, this is quite laughable. so you tell me what she meant by solution as i dont know as im not in the party.
Seriously, you are stupid. I just told you, and you only need to have a brain to know what it means.
Any proof to your claim that the "anti-government rhetoric from the right" had an impact on the shooter? Or are you just using this shooting as a vehicle for your own political views, manifesting the same opportunist mindset of both the democrats and republicans?
No; no more than you have any that it didn’t. It’s just a coincidence that the Democratic Congressman who had her office vandalized after the health insurance reform bill, Palin puts gun sights on her district to be taken out, the Congresswoman is on tape saying there are consequences of Palin’s irresponsible actions and then she is shot in the head.
Sounds a lot like a “Second Amendment remedy” to me. Like I and the Congresswomen said, words have consequences, and Palin is not the victim here.
you are the most uninformed blogger ever.
the congresswoman voted against obamacare. the gun man was pissed at her because she voted against it is part of his reasoning.
your words have consequences statement, bill maher. enjoy.
uno mas, obama disagrees with you on the words and statements
Thank you. Coming from you someone like you, that’s a compliment. Sorry, I never said that was why he shot her; I just pointed out the obvious. Only in your warped world is pointing out a fact hate speech.
I am taking responsibility for what I write, and that’s why I never used violent rhetoric like the teabggers use. For instance, I would never, ever tell someone to take up and gun if we lost an election. Plus, I use my own name and take ownership of what I write instead of hiding behind an anonymous screen name.
anonymous is not anonymous. you are making implications. so if someone says something like take up some 2nd ammendment solution, maybe its bad to say who knows. but the fact of the matter is this, if the person kills someone they have the problems, its not the words they hear. if they cant separate politics, movies, video games etc from the real world they have issues.
the only "violent" rhetoric the "teabaggers" have used is what allegedly sharon angle said and meant.
now bill maher for example is a whole different animal.
what made that guy fly into the irs building? he was a democrat. al qaeda, sorry osama bin laden endorsed john kerry and obama, maybe the democrats are influencing them too and because of the lefts hate speech on big business and the rich and wall street etc 9/11 happened and they targeted the WTC because its a major business hub, who knows? Who is to say why they would vote democrat if they could? a lot went on while Clinton was in "power". im just using your logic.
What kind of name is anonymous? not anonymous coward is exactly that.
Funny, Judas Priest was sued for a teen suicide, people blame rap music for violence all of the time and after a rightwing terrorist blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City Arabs were blamed. The fact is who knows what sets off an unbalanced mind, but it is a fact that violent, anti-government righting hate speech has led to deaths.
Maybe it's bad to want a Second Amendment remedy? It can only be interpreted one way.
If you believe the only violent" rhetoric the "teabaggers" have used came only from Sharon Angle then you have been living under a rock for the past two years.
What made the guy fly into the IRS building; anti-government rhetoric from the right. Let me see, who calls taxes stealing?
Once again, no hate speech from a Democrat has ever led a Democrat to kill a Republican. Never. What you’re using is not logic.
Never said Palin was a victim, or that her target map wasn't irresponsible. But there's no proof that it had anything at all to do with the shooting, and there's no need to jump to conclusions as to what motivated the shooter.
So there's no reason to imply (like you have been) a connection between the map and the shooting.
Also, Palin and the Neo-Cons have nothing to do with what the right wing truly is. Neo-Conservatives are Conservative in name only and are not right wing, despite attempts from both modern liberals and republicans to paint them as such.
She is playing the victim, and her target map was irresponsible as was her gun rhetoric.
Like I said, it’s just a coincidence that the Democratic Congressman who had her office vandalized after the health insurance reform bill, Palin puts gun sights on her district to be taken out, the Congresswoman is on tape saying there are consequences of Palin’s irresponsible actions and then she is shot in the head.
That is what’s called pointing out the obvious.
Perhaps you are right about conservatives because we have never seen extremists that control the Republican Party like this.
And I agree that she's playing the victim and her map was unprofessional. Yet you continue to imply that violent rhetoric(tm), hate speech(tm), etc. is connected to a senseless act of chaos.
Also, the NeoCons/current republicans aren't extremists in any sense. An extremist would have the balls to point out that America's current method of operating has failed, instead of polarizing the nation over details while passively accepting the big picture. Like the democrats, they're style over substance.
The map was beyond unprofessional; it was irresponsible and inflammatory. I don’t know how many more examples of hate speech and anti-government rhetoric that leads to violence before people say enough.
“The NeoCons/current republicans aren't extremists in any sense?” Wow. You lost me there. You obviously have not been paying attention the past two years.
If you want to see substance, take a look at the accomplishments over the last two years as opposed to ridiculous tea parties that have brought back the anti-government militias and the white supremacists.
" I will continue to blame the right because their bullshit has spawned violence. I would say he is anti-government, and like I said when this teabagger shit cropped up, I heard the same BS back in 1995."
" I don’t know or care who invented the idea of bull’s eyes because it’s irrelevant. The fact is that Palin used it coupled with violent gun rhetoric like “don’t retreat reload” and the person shot in the head herself expressed concern for her safety because of it after her office was attacked because she voted for health insurance reform."
"I don’t know how many more examples of hate speech and anti-government rhetoric that leads to violence before people say enough."
" The fact is who knows what sets off an unbalanced mind, but it is a fact that violent, anti-government righting hate speech has led to deaths."
You still haven't addressed the blatant inconsistency illustrated by your comments. Did violent rhetoric from the "right" trigger Loughner, OR, is there not enough evidence to form a conclusion at this point? Pick one or the other. Not both.
"If you want to see substance, take a look at the accomplishments over the last two years..."
And by substance you mean the continuation of America's downspiral while relying on the "post-racial" image and pleasant sounding memes for popularity? Sounds like style over substance.
"... as opposed to ridiculous tea parties that have brought back the anti-government militias and the white supremacists."
Funny. I thought we always had those. Never knew they fell off the face of the Earth and respawned from the Tea Party.
*edited for typo
" I will continue to blame the right because their bullshit has spawned violence. I would say he is anti-government, and like I said when this teabagger shit cropped up, I heard the same BS back in 1995."
True.
" I don’t know or care who invented the idea of bull’s eyes because it’s irrelevant. The fact is that Palin used it coupled with violent gun rhetoric like “don’t retreat reload” and the person shot in the head herself expressed concern for her safety because of it after her office was attacked because she voted for health insurance reform."
True.
"I don’t know how many more examples of hate speech and anti-government rhetoric that leads to violence before people say enough."
True.
" The fact is who knows what sets off an unbalanced mind, but it is a fact that violent, anti-government righting hate speech has led to deaths."
True.
No where in those quotes did I say Palin was directly responsibility for this latest attack on a Democrat. However, the fact remains it has in the past, and it may have again.
You still haven't addressed the blatant inconsistency illustrated by your comments. Did
“America's down spiral(sic)?” How about lifting the country out of a recession that was so bad the country was on the brink of a recession. Now that was a downward spiral. Just saving the country from a depression is a heck of an accomplishment even if you don’t include historic health insurance reform, financial reform and equal pay for equal work. Sounds like lots of substance.
"... as opposed to ridiculous tea parties that have brought back the anti-government militias and the white supremacists."
True.
Those scumbags have always been around, but they weren’t as mainstream as they are now. They all but died after the 1995 rightwing terrorist attack in Oklahoma City, but they are back with a vengeance. You can read about it here on this blog.
thanks kevin, you made our days.
Nice of you to finally admit defeat, but are you more than one person?
your statement made my day. your politics is even funnier. how is obama not a liberal? and yes still one and the same, just me.
If you paid even the slightest attention to politics you would know he a centrist. But in fairness, with the state of the Republican Party today, even Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan would be considered liberals by today’s standards.
If you're saying there's not enough information as to what did or didn't trigger Loughner (anything's possible) I agree. Yet some of your previous statements seem to imply Palin's responsible via proxy (Palin -> Violent Rhetoric -> Violence). If I've misread, I apologize.
" How about lifting the country out of a recession ...sounds like lots of substance"
Did we fix the country, or are we just expanding a system that will eventually collapse under its own weight/spending? Though we've brought ourselves out of an economic catastrophe(for now), short-term success isn't an indicator of real success.
Such collapse isn't linear either. It's cyclical, similar to a positive feedback loop. We're still in a downward spiral, and we've been in it for at least several decades.
"Those scumbags have always been around, but they weren’t as mainstream as they are now. They all but died after the 1995 rightwing terrorist attack in Oklahoma City, but they are back with a vengeance. You can read about it here on this blog. "
I'd say the increased mainstream attention for such groups is because they're willing to discuss problems that our current politicians aren't (or at least dance around with vague statements and half-assed remedies).
Immigration, racial diversity, and cultural erosion are having a negative impact on our society, and supremacists will gain more ground unless a discussion takes place. The longer such a discussion is delayed, the more ground the supremacists will gain with the mainstream.
As for whether Obama's a leftist or a centrist, the left/right spectrum is inaccurate as labels are continually redefined. Within our current paradigm, almost all politicians could be considered "left" to varying degrees if going by the original left/right wing model (left = the individual as the prime importance, right = societal order and cohesion as the main focus)
The Republicrats and Democons are both trying to appease the ever-growing demands of the individual, but are going about it in different ways. Limited resources vs unlimited (and growing) wants with neither side offering a remedy. But I'll say this: while I certainly disagree with Obama's policies, he's not the rampaging frothing Socialist his detractors make him out to be.
so youre saying he is a socialist though, nice. just not a rampaign frothing one.
He's left wing, but not a Socialist. Socialism is a specific label on the left spectrum, not the default position of everyone identifying as left.
Doesn't change the fact I think Obama's destructive. He's just not a Socialist. That's all.
The only word I can think of to describe that ridiculous rant is bullshit.
If you want to talk about destructive, how about plunging the country into the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression? Now that’s truly destructive.
I don't recall saying economic disaster isn't destructive. All I said was that Obama's policies, overall, are going to make things worse.
Short term success =/= Long term stability. Unfortunately, we have a country where the average person can't think 2 seconds ahead of themselves. No wonder such concepts aren't understood...
I disagree.
Post a Comment