Blaming Sarah Palin for Arizona Shooting Is Wrong

[^_^ 5,021]

Following this weekend's tragic shooting, many on the left in the United States are calling for Sarah Palin and the Tea Party to be called to account for their alleged culpability in the killings. But these claims are spurious and could do more to help the left's political detractors than harm them.

Saturday's assassination attempt on Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is a tragedy, but this tragedy could also present an opportunity in American politics -- a chance to return to a more civil political debate and finally overcome the divisions that have characterized the country since the presidency of George W. Bush. But only hours after the assassination attempt on the Congresswomen, which left six people dead and 14 injured, the debate showed signs of derailing.

Of all people, it is precisely those who have complained the loudest about the culture of debate -- about the rhetoric of the Tea Party, the right wing's harsh words and the baseless Obama-Hitler comparisons -- who are now poisoning the debate with their own baseless insinuations. With little reliance on facts, they began searching for scapegoats for the attack and they found them, selectively, among the right wing, the Tea Party, Republican Party boss Michael Steele and Tea Party heroine Sarah Palin.

...

The language used by Palin and a few Tea Party supporters is doubtlessly raw and inappropriate, but there is in no way any proof whatsoever that they inspired the crime committed this weekend in Arizona. What little is known about the perpetrator does not suggest that he was a supporter of the Tea Party or an admirer of Palin's -- he doesn't even appear to have any clear political convictions. His favorite books include the "Communist Manifesto," Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and "Peter Pan," an erratic hodge podge. So far, there is no evidence that there were any political motives behind the crime.

Indeed, the massive criticism of Sarah Palin is misguided. This is not only due to the fact that the accusation is baseless, but also because the calculated attempt to weaken Palin in this manner could ultimately backfire.

The reasoning is quite simple: Palin has always profited in the role of victim -- a victim of the liberal elite. Time and again, she has been made fun of -- when, for example, she spoke for the first time about foreign policy during the 2008 presidential campaign, and later when she wrote notes on her hand during speeches and television appearances. But every time people made fun of the Alaska politician or attacked her as being superficial and unqualified, it merely helped deepen the support of her followers. Now, the allegation that she carries partial responsibility for what has happened in Arizona could turn out to do more to help than harm her.

Yet again, she could emerge as a political martyr.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,738627,00.html#ref=rss

Edited January 10, 2011 by \

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Agreed absolutely a mmonumentally stupid accusation but let's not beat this issue to death.

[Jenn! 918]

Can I blame Sarah Palin for other things? Like my bad hair day?

[zqt3344 21]

Blame it on all these dip$hit politicians, all of them do nothing but jerk the American public around constantly and then wonder why or how something like this could happen, really not surprising, think about it, surprising that it does not happen more often after the past 2 years!  And especially after the past 10 years it has been nothing short of a total joke how both parties suck royally and did nothing to help the American people only their radical left or radical right wing in each party.  Way to go American politicians, you all suck. 

Following this weekend's tragic shooting, many on the left in the United States are calling for Sarah Palin and the Tea Party to be called to account for their alleged culpability in the killings. But these claims are spurious and could do more to help the left's political detractors than harm them.

Saturday's assassination attempt on Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is a tragedy, but this tragedy could also present an opportunity in American politics -- a chance to return to a more civil political debate and finally overcome the divisions that have characterized the country since the presidency of George W. Bush. But only hours after the assassination attempt on the Congresswomen, which left six people dead and 14 injured, the debate showed signs of derailing.

Of all people, it is precisely those who have complained the loudest about the culture of debate -- about the rhetoric of the Tea Party, the right wing's harsh words and the baseless Obama-Hitler comparisons -- who are now poisoning the debate with their own baseless insinuations. With little reliance on facts, they began searching for scapegoats for the attack and they found them, selectively, among the right wing, the Tea Party, Republican Party boss Michael Steele and Tea Party heroine Sarah Palin.

...

The language used by Palin and a few Tea Party supporters is doubtlessly raw and inappropriate, but there is in no way any proof whatsoever that they inspired the crime committed this weekend in Arizona. What little is known about the perpetrator does not suggest that he was a supporter of the Tea Party or an admirer of Palin's -- he doesn't even appear to have any clear political convictions. His favorite books include the "Communist Manifesto," Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and "Peter Pan," an erratic hodge podge. So far, there is no evidence that there were any political motives behind the crime.

Indeed, the massive criticism of Sarah Palin is misguided. This is not only due to the fact that the accusation is baseless, but also because the calculated attempt to weaken Palin in this manner could ultimately backfire.

The reasoning is quite simple: Palin has always profited in the role of victim -- a victim of the liberal elite. Time and again, she has been made fun of -- when, for example, she spoke for the first time about foreign policy during the 2008 presidential campaign, and later when she wrote notes on her hand during speeches and television appearances. But every time people made fun of the Alaska politician or attacked her as being superficial and unqualified, it merely helped deepen the support of her followers. Now, the allegation that she carries partial responsibility for what has happened in Arizona could turn out to do more to help than harm her.

Yet again, she could emerge as a political martyr.

http://www.spiegel.d...00.html#ref=rss

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Financial Times Deutschland makes a valid point, however:

"Es spricht Bände, dass Tea-Party-Vertreter wie die frühere Vizepräsidentschaftskandidatin Sarah Palin die plumpe Metaphorik am Samstag eilends von ihren Websites entfernten."

...

"It speaks volumes that Tea Party members like former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin removed crude imagery from their websites in a hurry on Saturday."

[Jenn! 918]

Financial Times Deutschland makes a valid point, however:

"Es spricht Bände, dass Tea-Party-Vertreter wie die frühere Vizepräsidentschaftskandidatin Sarah Palin die plumpe Metaphorik am Samstag eilends von ihren Websites entfernten."

...

"It speaks volumes that Tea Party members like former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin removed crude imagery from their websites in a hurry on Saturday."

What does it say, other than that they'd rather not give detractors ammunition to make outrageous claims?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

What does it say, other than that they'd rather not give detractors ammunition to make outrageous claims?

If there's nothing wrong with it and if it is indeed all innocent, then why the need to hastily take it down? If it's defensible, why not defend it?

[^_^ 5,021]

If there's nothing wrong with it and if it is indeed all innocent, then why the need to hastily take it down? If it's defensible, why not defend it?

In what little we've seen from his YouTube channel, there is no reason to believe he was in any way Tea Party inspired. No reason at all.

Now, once the full story comes out (or more of it, at any rate) it may turn out that he is Sarah Palin's right hand man or perhaps Todd Palin's gay lover on the side. But until then, we have to go on what we know and what we know about Mr. Loughner doesn't indicate any links to the Palins.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In what little we've seen from his YouTube channel, there is no reason to believe he was in any way Tea Party inspired. No reason at all.

Now, once the full story comes out (or more of it, at any rate) it may turn out that he is Sarah Palin's right hand man or perhaps Todd Palin's gay lover on the side. But until then, we have to go on what we know and what we know about Mr. Loughner doesn't indicate any links to the Palins.

Then what's the haste to remove all this "innocent" imagery from the web sites?

[Ban Hammer 12,836]

Then what's the haste to remove all this "innocent" imagery from the web sites?

because people will make mountains out of it the longer it stayed.

[^_^ 5,021]

Then what's the haste to remove all this "innocent" imagery from the web sites?

It wouldn't be unreasonable for them to have believed that the imagery had motivated him. The imagery is clearly incendiary. So they removed it - a CYA move basically.

But after all that, we saw his YouTube channel - which revealed not a teabagger nutjob but something much worse. The kind of nutjob you can't really pin down with a label. A communist (Communist Manifesto) and a white supremacist (Mein Kampf) and a fan of eastern theology (Siddhartha) who also enjoys burning the US flag? ####### is that?

It's a freak. That's what.

[TheSahlis 10]

What does it say, other than that they'd rather not give detractors ammunition to make outrageous claims?

its funny right from the start its blame the Conservatives, yet now it comes out this guy liked to read Marx not Reagan so maybe its a lefty who was mad because this poor lady liked guns and just wasn't left enough for him...............but of coarse as many on the left have said through history.....never waste a good tragedy. (paraphrase of coarse)

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

because people will make mountains out of it the longer it stayed.

The mountains are made one way or the other - removing it from the website doesn't remove it from memory and doesn't turn back time to where it never happened. The decision to be made, then, is whether the imagery is indeed innocent and defensible in which case you stand by it and leave it where it is or whether it is inappropriate and indefensible in which case you remove it. Seems that we have arrived at the latter.

[^_^ 5,021]

its funny right from the start its blame the Conservatives, yet now it comes out this guy liked to read Marx not Reagan so maybe its a lefty who was mad because this poor lady liked guns and just wasn't left enough for him...............but of coarse as many on the left have said through history.....never waste a good tragedy. (paraphrase of coarse)

Stop right there with the lies, Mr. RWN. I have been hearing this garbage since yesterday - he's a communist! What kind of communist favorites the Mein Kampf or Ayn Rand's We the Living? Give me a fu*king break.

And then, of course, there are his videos where he rambles on and on about dreaming and sleepwalking and how the government controls grammar. Communist? Really?

GTFO.

The mountains are made one way or the other - removing it from the website doesn't remove it from memory and doesn't turn back time to where it never happened. The decision to be made, then, is whether the imagery is indeed innocent and defensible in which case you stand by it and leave it where it is or whether it is inappropriate and indefensible in which case you remove it. Seems that we have arrived at the latter.

The imagery can be indefensible and have nothing to do with Mr. Loughner's motivations. That is where we've arrived at, as of right now.

Edited January 10, 2011 by \

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The imagery can be indefensible and have nothing to do with Mr. Loughner's motivations. That is where we've arrived at, as of right now.

Okay, so it's indefensible. That's been pointed out when it first appeared. The reaction then was quite different: Don't retreat - reload. Remember?