Arizona Congresswoman Shot in the Head at Public Event

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Really? I've heard the talking heads at MSNBC and CNN find ways to blame this on "hate speech" aka the opinions of those who disagree with Obama and the Progressives, every chance they have.

Really? They said that speech against Democrats and Obama should be banned? That's outrageous. We need to do something.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Really? They said that speech against Democrats and Obama should be banned? That's outrageous. We need to do something.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I was simply repeating your hysterics. And yes, I continue to find them distasteful.

Blood libel?????
OK you could let Palins camp get away with nonsense about them really depicting surveyors instruments as that was so laughable, but to now claim they are the victims and to use such phrases really sinks Palin to new lows.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Blood libel?????
OK you could let Palins camp get away with nonsense about them really depicting surveyors instruments as that was so laughable, but to now claim they are the victims and to use such phrases really sinks Palin to new lows.

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. People jumped all over her for the picture on her website. People can call it 'unicode 2316' if that makes them feel more justified in their views, but the bottom line is that it was designed to look like a target reticule. However, the so-called Tea Party's message was also clear; they were unhappy with the voting records of certain politicians and were targeting their districts in attempts to get out the vote. There was no advocacy of assasination, and attemps to imply that there was are both diststasteful and insensitive.

Yes, it is true that Giffords herself was on television calling that image as advocacy of assasination. She was playing the political game, just like that all do; over react and make noise to demonize the opposition. There is no justification for what happened to her, but to imply that Palin is responsible is just as disgusting as other attempts to skew this tragedy for political gain.

[Tchocky]

Anyone catch Monday's Daily Show? I thought Jon hit the nail on the head in a fairly serious way.

[Growler]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

There is no justification for what happened to her, but to imply that Palin is responsible is just as disgusting as other attempts to skew this tragedy for political gain.

This. Anything that ANY politician does publicly WILL be interpreted by both sides in ways favorable to their own position and, even better, detrimental to the opposition's.

Where I fault Palin's PAC is in creating such an image that was THAT open to abuse by the other side. Her handlers should have known better.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Growler

Her handlers should have known better.

Does this mean, you think, she hasn't a mind of here self?

[Freiwillige]

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. People jumped all over her for the picture on her website. People can call it 'unicode 2316' if that makes them feel more justified in their views, but the bottom line is that it was designed to look like a target reticule. However, the so-called Tea Party's message was also clear; they were unhappy with the voting records of certain politicians and were targeting their districts in attempts to get out the vote. There was no advocacy of assasination, and attemps to imply that there was are both diststasteful and insensitive.

Yes, it is true that Giffords herself was on television calling that image as advocacy of assasination. She was playing the political game, just like that all do; over react and make noise to demonize the opposition. There is no justification for what happened to her, but to imply that Palin is responsible is just as disgusting as other attempts to skew this tragedy for political gain.

[Skybird]

Palin (and some others of the Tea Party) so often have used vicious rethorics and verbal vitriol that she has no right to complain if now, justified or not, she is beeing given a share of responsibility for the extreme polarisizing of the political climate and the often hate-filled atmosphere in political debates. For many, in my perception dominantly from the right wing, martial rethorics and ultra-aggressive verbal atacks seem to have become a purpose in itself. America seems to be uniquze, in these regards - protect by the claim for "unlimited free speech", everything is allowed and acceptable, even rightout lies and most vicious offenses. For much what is being used as rethorical ammunition mostlky by the Amerian right, in man y european countries you would be sued over charges of intentional character-assassination, libel and slander. Yes, these laws can be abused for censorship, and soemtimes it happens. But the American way, to offer unlimited freedom of speech, often leads to the abuse of free speech, and rethorics gaining dominance over argument and reason. Anf this is not worthy of America.

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.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I was simply repeating your hysterics. And yes, I continue to find them distasteful.

I was aware of your sarcasm.How can you write that pointing out the fact that the left is exploting this tragedy to advance their agenda constitutes hysterics? Perhaps just because you disagree with me.The left has a pattern of behavior when it comes to exploiting tragedies to advance their agenda and settle scores if possible.Clinton and the left after OKC is a great example.I was young and do not remember but from what I can tell and have read, they tried to peg it on Rush Limbaugh etc

I have mentioned several times that the Right would prob exploit this had the situation been reversed and I also pointed out that it is wrong to exploit this no matter who is on what side.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I was aware of your sarcasm.How can you write that pointing out the fact that the left is exploting this tragedy to advance their agenda constitutes hysterics? Perhaps just because you disagree with me.The left has a pattern of behavior when it comes to exploiting tragedies to advance their agenda and settle scores if possible.Clinton and the left after OKC is a great example.I was young and do not remember but from what I can tell and have read, they tried to peg it on Rush Limbaugh etc

I have mentioned several times that the Right would prob exploit this had the situation been reversed and I also pointed out that it is wrong to exploit this no matter who is on what side.

I can say that it constitutes hysterics due to the flexible standards that you hold. Your second sentence begins yet another anti-left tirade in which you yourself attempt to utilize this event to place your team in a better light. You conclude with a claim of impartiality that you have never demonstrated. So, yes, I fundamentally disagree with your assertions.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I was aware of your sarcasm.How can you write that pointing out the fact that the left is exploting this tragedy to advance their agenda constitutes hysterics? Perhaps just because you disagree with me.The left has a pattern of behavior when it comes to exploiting tragedies to advance their agenda and settle scores if possible.Clinton and the left after OKC is a great example.I was young and do not remember but from what I can tell and have read, they tried to peg it on Rush Limbaugh etc

I have mentioned several times that the Right would prob exploit this had the situation been reversed and I also pointed out that it is wrong to exploit this no matter who is on what side.

Just stop. Seriously. You have absolutely nothing to add to any of this.