Arizona Congresswoman Shot in the Head at Public Event

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

I see even the left didn't heed Obama's message .. to talk with each other "in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds."

Good, now we can get on with the conflict of vision.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by tater

There is a system to help, but as a citizen he has to avail himself of it. If he doesn't because he has a frank mental illness, then his liberty to decide about his own health needs to be taken away. The US used to do this, but complaints about institutionalizing people lead to that stopping. Removing this basic human right from people (their very freedom) is something Americans are loathe to do (sorry if that is a "simple" solution, but taking away someone's freedom is a last resort, not a first one).

I've seen the cycle personally, as my brother was schizophrenic. Being schizophrenic doesn't make you dangerous, but there is overlap between those that ARE dangerous and those that are not (even if the dangerous are a tiny minority). Requiring treatment means taking away their personal freedom. Requiring people to take meds pretty much requires incarceration (since unless you watch them swallow the meds, you have no way of knowing if they take them).

This post got buried during the theatre, and I think that it is the one thing that could possibly be a good outcome here. We have a long way to go in improving the quality of mental health care. However, as the road to this tragedy was underway, the shooter's family and loved ones stood by and did nothing. A major lesson to take away is that it is critical to step in and be involved in the lives of troubled loved ones. You may step on some toes, but you will save a life.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I will give you that 'blood libel' was yet another poor selection of words by Sarah Palin, but aside from that, she does have a very good point.

But Palin wasn't the first to use 'blood libel' phrase in this case. It was used as a headline on Jan. 10. It wasn't until Palin used it that the left got nuts about it. Palin Derangement Syndrom?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...818696964.html

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

But Palin wasn't the first to use 'blood libel' phrase in this case. It was used as a headline on Jan. 10. It wasn't until Palin used it that the left gaot nuts about it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...818696964.html

That still doesn't make it okay, does it? I mean, is the answer always 'yeah, but look at what they're doing'? Wrong is wrong, and repeating wrongs don't make them right.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

That still doesn't make it okay, does it? I mean, is the answer always 'yeah, but look at what they're doing'? Wrong is wrong, and repeating wrongs don't make them right.

Who started the attacks? Defense is a legitimate response to an attack.

Originally Posted by gimpy117

I don't to point fingers...but it warrants a mention that she had just edged out a tea party candidate in a close election. With all those stirrings of armed revolution in that party...it makes me wonder.

[Takeda Shingen]

So your point in the use of the term 'blood libel' is that gimpy said that he thought that Palin is responsible for the attacks? Well, I'll point you back to post No. 11 for my response.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...7&postcount=11

More to the point, that Palin has a legitimate point does not mean that the term wasn't used in poor taste; it was. Either that, or Palin is now Jewish and we should anticipate a new pogrom. Since I doubt either of those are the case, I would suspect that the term is somewhat insensitively used in such a context.

But Palin wasn't the first to use 'blood libel' phrase in this case. It was used as a headline on Jan. 10. It wasn't until Palin used it that the left got nuts about it. Palin Derangement Syndrom?

Is that because Palin gets more attention than an article taken from a wingnut blog?
People expect PJ media to be full of crazy crap, perhaps they foolishly expected better from Palin.

[tater]

"Blood libel" gets used as a phrase all the time, and not always in the proper context. I'm sure we could find other people using it and not getting 1:100th of the coverage her use got.

Regardless, she has also been named as if she was a causal factor in this attack, which is patently absurd.

Having a national conversation on "tone" is a perfectly reasonable discussion to have, but it is entirely unrelated to this terrible crime. The first step might be to fire or otherwise shun those in government and media who even discussed "tone" as possibly contributing (the very conversation in the context of this attack is biased given there has yet to be any evidence the crazy perp was so-motivated).

[AVGWarhawk]

crazy perp

That is all he is. I posted this a bunch of pages back. The guy was a loser and a loaner. Nothing to loose. He is the John Hinkley Jr of this decade. Nothing more and nothing less.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by tater

"Blood libel" gets used as a phrase all the time, and not always in the proper context. I'm sure we could find other people using it and not getting 1:100th of the coverage her use got.

And yet, my point stands. Show the others to me and I will tell you that they also wrong for doing so. People throughout time have used terms in an offensive manner. That use does not, however, excuse continued use.

[August]

Originally Posted by tater

Having a national conversation on "tone" is a perfectly reasonable discussion to have, but it is entirely unrelated to this terrible crime.

I agree totally but unfortunately nobody wants to hear it.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

And yet, my point stands. Show the others to me and I will tell you that they also wrong for doing so. People throught time have used terms in an offensive manner. That use does not, however, excuse continued use.

Alan Dershowitz (not at all conservative) said WRT Palin and the use of the phrase:

The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.

A few examples of use that got virtually zero bad press:

Andrew Sullivan, October 10, 2008:

A couple of obvious thoughts. Paladino speaks of “perverts who target our children and seek to destroy their lives.” This is the gay equivalent of the medieval (and Islamist) blood-libel against Jews.

The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson:
who said the Pittsburgh hoax was “the blood libel against black men concerning the defilement of the flower of Caucasian womanhood. It’s been with us for hundreds of years and, apparently, is still with us.”

Peter Deutsch on Crossfire (regarding the 2000 recount):
Let me just talk a little bit about the whole, I guess, spin from the Republicans about — which has been to me the absolute most — the worst statements I have ever heard probably in my life about anything. I mean, almost a blood libel by the Republicans towards Al Gore, saying that he was trying to stop men and women in uniform that are serving this country from voting. That is the most absurd thing and absolutely has no basis in fact at all.

Andrew Cohen, CBS News, May 7, 2008:
So-called “judicial activism” occurs, in other words, when it’s your side that lost the case and it is nothing short of a blood libel against judges to accuse them of operating by fiat.

Frank Rich, NYT, October 15, 2006:
The moment Mr. Foley’s e-mails became known, we saw that brand of fearmongering and bigotry at full tilt: Bush administration allies exploited the former Congressman’s predatory history to spread the grotesque canard that homosexuality is a direct path to pedophilia. It’s the kind of blood libel that in another era was spread about Jews.

I should add that I agree with you regarding the use of the phrase. Personally, I think it dilutes the real meaning. I feel the same about the misuse of "gulag" by the left during the Bush administration to refer to Gitmo. That said, if the media wants to attack Palin for the misuse, they need to spend the exact same amount of time attacking everyone else that uses it—even their own reporters (reporters and columnists are, after all, professional wordsmiths, if anything, their use of language should be held to an even higher standard).

[Takeda Shingen]

And Andrew Sullivan, The Washington Post's Eugine Robinson, Peter Deutsch, Andrew Cohen and Frank Rich are wrong for using this term. It is inappropriate and I find it offensive. I disagree with Alan Dershowitz, and if you would like to find any others, I will happily tell you that they are wrong for using it as well.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

And Andrew Sullivan, The Washington Post's Eugine Robinson, Peter Deutsch, Andrew Cohen and Frank Rich are wrong for using this term. It is inappropriate and I find it offensive. I disagree with Alan Dershowitz, and if you would like to find any others, I will happily tell you that they are wrong for using it as well.

I edited in that I agree with you—but I've read the press attacking Palin for the use, and they didn't attack anyone else for using it.

Dershowitz at least has the legitimate jewish credentials to have a more valid opinion on it than I do, and he's not a right-wing partisan, either, so it's at least a fair POV.

PS to skybird: you claim Palin has used "vicious" rhetoric in the past. Quote some examples, and I can tell you if they are indeed "vicious" to a native North American English speaker. I'll be surprised if you can find any at all. Vicious is a pretty high bar, so just posting "snarky" won't cut it.

[AVGWarhawk]

I will tell you that this Palin attack and blood libel issue is the worst misdirection of energies I have seen in a long time. Perhaps on day everyone will realize this 22 year old was nothing but a nut case and nothing more. He was not driven by any one thing but by several things in his life.