An Open Letter to Sarah Palin About Guilt by Association

January 9, 2011 at 12:40 am 242 comments

Dear Mrs. Palin,

Since you have offered your condolences, it is safe to assume you already know that Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot today while holding an open air town hall of sorts in Tuscon, Arizona. This is the same Gabrielle Giffords whom you hoped would be defeated in the recent November elections. You expressed that wish by superimposing the crosshairs of a rifle scope over Giffords’ district on a US map on your web site. It’s a graphic that was quickly removed from your site in the immediate aftermath of her shooting.

MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, hosted a special edition of “Countdown” in which he urged you to repudiate your use of violent symbolism in the wake of this tragedy. I don’t expect you take his advice because it would imply you were somehow responsible for this tragedy. Let’s be honest. We don’t know yet if the shooter has ever even heard of you. We don’t know if he has ever visited your web site. In fact, from the little we seem to know, he is a typical run of the mill nutjob. We can’t even pin down his political affiliation because while he appears to be an Ayn Rand fan and has a strangely conservative fear of government, he also has the Communist Manifesto on his reading list. So truly Mrs. Palin, it is a stretch to say you even inspired this terrible act of violence.

So I will offer you an alternative bit of advice. By end of business, Monday, you need to line up every political advisor and public relations person currently in your employ who was working for you during the 2010 campaign season …

AND FIRE THEM.

They did you a disservice Mrs. Palin. Crosshairs are a symbol of violence, plain and simple. It boggles the mind that no one in your employ at the time vetoed that graphic. Now of course the graphic made quite a splash when it first hit the web. Liberals went bat-crap crazy when they saw it. Understandably, your advisors probably felt, who cares what liberals think? In fact, let’s go out of our way to piss them off. But they missed the obvious problem. What if some nutjob down the line tries to murder anyone on your metaphorical hit list? At that point, what was once just poor taste, will suddenly look like an explicit call to violence. Is that fair? Maybe not. But that is the way people think. Hell, that is the way you think. You warned America about a Presidential candidate who “paled around with terrorists”. You, more than anyone understand the potency of guilt by association.

Do you understand how police investigations work, Mrs. Palin? One of the first questions the police want answered is who has ever threatened the victim. When Bob is shot by Bill, the police ask witnesses “any reason to think Bill wanted Bob dead?” They might get the answer, “well Bill told Bob once, ‘I’m gonna kill you’ but he didn’t really mean it.” Did anyone want harm to come to Representative Giffords? Well, a former Vice Presidential candidate used a gunshot metaphor to advocate her defeat in an election, but she didn’t mean for anyone to actually shoot her.

Either because your advisors are phenomenally stupid or they are afraid of you, they allowed you to put yourself in association with an attempted murder. I don’t know if your conscience will trouble you tonight as Ms. Giffords fights for her life in a Tuscon ICU, but from at least a very practical, very political point of view, you should be steaming mad at the folks you hired to make you look good.

They failed you, Mrs. Palin. We didn’t understand until today just how badly they failed you.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

About these ads

Entry filed under: Politics, Social commentary, Wordpress Political Blogs. Tags: , .

A Good Start for John Boehner, Really “Guns Don’t Kill People. People Kill People” — Still Stupid

242 Comments Add your own

  • 1. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2011 at 12:52 am

    “If they’re successful in doing that, they’ve already said they’re going to go back to the same policies that were in place during the Bush administration. That means that we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill.“

  • 2. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 12:56 am

    Rutherford, did you even read the comments here today?

    Really, the target meme? Unless you are going to DEMAND with equal vigor the same sackcloth and ashes for the Democratic Leadership Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Chris Van Holland, you are nothing but a fraud.

    http://www.verumserum.com/?p=13647

    Oh, yeah, and the Daily KOS, too:

    http://twitpic.com/3o7s5c

    Let me know when you issue your apology.

    In the meantime, my antidote to this foolishness is posted here:

    http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/freedom-in-the-crosshairs/

  • 3. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:05 am

    Oh, I get it. Palin’s advisers are guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

    I don’t remember blaming Jody Foster or Robert De Niro when Reagan was shot, but they should have known acting out a part to inspire John Hinckley to assassinate the President was how did Rutherford put it, “some nutjob down the line tries to murder anyone on the metaphorical hit list?”

    This is the absolute stupidest post I’ve ever read on this blog.

    You’re so desperate for damage control, I’ll bet you’re actually in some sick way enjoying twisting this tragedy Rutherford to score some much needed political points after your personal investment has come up dry as a bone the last 24 months.

    Sick. Real sick – more sick than insinuating Palin named her Downs child after his genetic defect.

    More proof modern day liberals have a mental disease.

  • 4. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:17 am

    Here you go, R.

    Another use of the “Target Meme” against Representative Giffords, memory holed by….wait for it…The DailyKOS.

    http://thehostages.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/kos_is_a_dickface.jpg

    I’m serious. I want that apology.

  • 5. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:27 am

    It’s starting to make my skin crawl that I add to the comment tally and the hit count of this site.

    What the hell do I even come here for?

    To read some dude who sits in his house all day, finding the most disgusting and outrageous ways to vilify Sara Palin?

    Would I be comfortable visiting a blog where the author did the same thing with Nancy Pelosi?

    No. I wouldn’t. And I mean that.

    I’m boycotting this place. Starting Monday, I will never return again. (Cue dramatic soap opera music)

    It’s kind of addicting, the give and take. It’s fun hashing stuff out.

    But, do I really want to draw attention to a guy who hates Sara Palin so much that he tries to pin a mass shooting on her over the use of a fucking metaphor? All before the bodies have even been taken to the morgue?

    Fellow conservative bloggers,

    I know I often times don’t add much to the discussion. I also know my prose itself has deteriorated over the last year or so. In other words, I’m a light weight. However, I humbly request you guys boycott this site. And by boycott, I mean we don’t even visit. Let the few libs here show up to give one another daily reach-arounds and tell themselves how right they were about Obamacare.

    A good buddy of mine, a Marine, once infuriated a Navy Chief at the end of a WestPac cruise with the following comment “Chief, I’m done with your ship, you can have it back.”

    Rutherford, you can have you blog back, I’m done with it.

  • 6. MCPO Airdale  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:28 am

    This is the most inane drivel written by a supposedly intelligent man I’ve ever read.

    Is this what you have finally come to?

  • 7. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:40 am

    Oh, I get it. Palin’s advisers are guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

    If that is really what you got out of that post, you’re 100 times dumber than I ever dreamed.

    The moral of the story is simple, let me give it to you in tiny bite sized morsels:

    1. Guilt by association is a bitch.
    2. A large part of the job of a pundit’s staff is to make sure she doesn’t say crap in some permanent medium like a web site that might make her look bad down the line.
    3. The Palin machine is enamored of this asinine Annie Oakley bullsh*t that they don’t see the poison that it puts in the wind.

    You’re just pissed that I didn’t go the full nine yards and call Palin a killer. The fact is, you can’t refute a f*cking thing I said in this article … other than to say stupid sh*t like I think her staff conspired to kill a Congresswoman.

  • 8. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:46 am

    BiW based on that Daily Kos article you’ll get no apology from me. As an attorney you ought to damn well know words mean different things in different contexts. You also know that images speak quite louder than words.

    If I say “I’m pissed off, BiW and my anger is targeted at you”, it implies the direction of my anger. It is the same as “my anger is aimed at you”. It has to do with direction. A crosshairs symbol means more than direction. It implies quite clearly the direction of a bullet. If you can’t see the difference between “target” used in prose and a symbol that explicitly implies fire power then there is really no use debating you, You’re either willfully ignorant or truly void of all nuance.

  • 9. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:53 am

    Rutherford. Look at the verumserum link. Even better, the first KOStard erasure saying she was DEAD to the diarist. If your nuance renders these things so much different, why did they disappear today? Maybe this is one of those times when tomaatoe/toemato makes as much difference as antique white/eggshell.

    As for your “crosshairs” analogy, I’ll simply laugh my way around the expertise of someone afraid of firearms and who has probably never hunted in his life.

    Did you know that some bowhunters use sights with crosshairs too? ZOMG!!!

    I think Rabbit’s right. The initial reaction of the left combined with your Palin Derangment provided the convenient excuse for the psychotic break you always wanted.

  • 10. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:55 am

    Your loss Rabbit …. the article is clearly written. It does not say what YOU want it to say. YOU want it to be a screed against Palin. In an odd way, I’m fully letting her off the hook with this article. I’ve never considered the woman too bright, so she needs folks to keep her out of trouble. They didn’t.

    And all you boys have a short memory. When during the Pres primary, Hillary Clinton made a comment that suggested Obama might get shot before the convention, I went bat-sh*t crazy on that too. There’s nothing partisan here.

    Careless expression has consequences. In this case, the consequence is NOT the shooting of Ms. Giffords. The consequence IS Palin’s name being associated with it. No crosshairs, no association. It really isn’t that hard to grok.

    And by the way, Rabbit … I’ve always been one of your biggest fans but if you’re gone, you’re gone … you don’t need the validation of everyone leaving with you. Stand on your own.

    I will miss you … have a good 2011.

  • 11. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:01 am

    Has it been established that the Congresswoman was actually the primary target?

    Was there a primary target?

    Do Rutherford or Olby care, either way?

  • 12. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:05 am

    Sorry but “you’re dead to me” never implied violence in my book. It implies you no longer exist … I’m not giving you another thought.

    Lots of web sites will probably be scrubbing stuff today on the right and the left to protect their position. That’s fine.

    Palin’s problem is very simple. She didn’t say “target Democrats”. She didn’t even put a huge crosshairs on the entire country as a symbol of targeting. Her handlers went out of their way to put crosshairs on each specific race, pointing at each specific person. It made folks uncomfortable back when it first happened and in retrospect it looks even worse.

    What is so sad, is that not a single one of you can admit that the crosshairs was a mistake. Not a single one is joining me in saying that somebody on her staff should have been fired for letting it go back last year, and should definitely be fired now.

    Palin Derangement Syndrome is an over-reaction to your inability to find any fault with the woman.

    The truth is … IF Palin had walked up to Giffords and shot her herself, you guys would be finding some way to blame everyone but Palin. You don’t get my PDS. I don’t get your blindness to her stupidity and in this case, her staff’s stupidity.

  • 13. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:09 am

    Huck, if she was an “innocent bystander” of course that affects how we should view the situation. From the reports I’ve heard:

    1. She was shot at point-blank range. Sounds pretty primary to me.

    2. She was the first to get shot.

    3. The nutjob did mention her either in a YouTube video or on his web site.

  • 14. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:18 am

    Also … I’m aware she is a blue dog. Hell, the nutjob might be a crazy lib who thought she wasn’t far enough left. I’m not discounting that possibility.

    The knee jerk reaction of some of my readers is to comment on what you expected me to write rather than what I wrote. I did not blame conservative politics. (Read it again … Ayn Rand AND The Communist Manifesto.) I didn’t blame Palin.

    And yes …. I did tweet about it. Very much in the same vein as this article. The crosshairs image was a terrible mistake. Her team obviously agrees with me now judging from the haste with which it was scrubbed from her web site today. And Sarah, knowing she would be the target of some mud slinging today, issues her condolences on f*cking Facebook. How bout a comment to the Associated Press or some other venue? Ah I forgot … they’re the lame stream media. Well, if you think my article went over the line, try reading some of the comments on her Facebook page. Try reading some of the other tweets she got.

    Puhleeeeze.

  • 15. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:19 am

    I don’t really know any of the facts. It’s my understanding that he just walked up to people and put the gun to their head and shot.

    If so, that’s just messed up, man….

    The whole thing is messed up, anyway.

  • 16. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:23 am

    Last but not least, before I go to bed … let me try one more time to summarize:

    Obama is no more responsible for Bill Ayers behavior in the 1960′s and 70′s than Palin is responsible for Ms. Giffords’ shooting. As I said earlier, for someone so adept at playing the guilt by association card, she should have known it could rebound upon her and she should have been more careful.

  • 17. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:28 am

    Huck, on that I completely agree with you. A nine year old girl lost her life today for no good reason. It might be spin, but early reports say she was brought there by an adult who knew she had a burgeoning interest in politics.

  • 18. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:31 am

    So I guess all of Obama’s handlers should get fired for allowing him to say dumb shit like this because of what some asshole nutjob might do?

  • 19. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:32 am

    WTF? Why isnt that link working?

  • 20. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:48 am

    Not playing gottcha, just trying to sort things out. With that said

    “At a news conference, Dupnik said the shooter moved towards the crowd and began firing. It was unclear if he said anything or who was shot first, Dupnik said.”

    The article makes multiple references to her being the target, but I don’t see how they established that.

  • 21. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:55 am

    Rabbit is right. I shouldn’t give you the time of day if this is what you’re made of – I’m already now ten days late on my New Year’s resolution – to get my life back.

    Rabbit is also right that as your party has failed you, you’ve grown stale. Instead of manning up to admit your philosophy failed and your party performance pitiful, you’ve actually gotten callow and more crass in your posts. You had the perfect opportunity to demonstrate some honor and truth and work for common good. Instead you’ve thrown a rod.

    Where you were at one time one of the few libs I had a grudging respect and a willingness to be reasonable, even fair occasionally, you’ve become the Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann of WordPress. If you are deluded enough to take that as compliment – think again. It’s obvious they’ve got more than a few screws loose. Sometime, someplace they go off the deep end, and it will not surprise me in the least that you join them soon thereafter.

    You speak of association and vitriol? Can I remind you, that you’re party to a bunch of assholes that actually made a film of Bush being assassinated – while the man was still in office? Where were your warnings of guilt by association, or concern about national temperament then?

    You speak of apologies? Where’s the apologies for this shit?

    http://nagarjunaa.blogspot.com/2010/04/death-threats-against-bush-at-protests.html

    You assholes pushed for fight. You assholes insulted anyone and everyone Republican, Christian and/or Conservative for eight long years with gutter talk and lies.

    Don’t be so stupid to push it further unless you’re absolutely sure you can personally back it up. You need to take a step back and reassess where you are, and if my teasing you has in anyway provoked any part of this, than I am truly sorry. I thought you a little tougher than this.

    But buddy, it is very obvious you’re starting to self-destruct. You can deny that all you want, but it is clear as day from here.

  • 22. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:03 am

    By the way Rutherford,

    If you can’t see the flippancy in my statement of Palin’s handlers guilty of conspiracy to commit murder, it isn’t me that is dumb.

    I was mocking the content of your entire lashing out, throwing up any trial balloon to see what will stick.

    I’m telling you – the only guilt by association that will come from this, is if the idiots from the left, out of the KKKos mold continue, to cast blame where at the right where none exists.

    I’m warning you – you’re a fool if you continue down this path. This was one lone nut job – but the fact this nation is sitting on a powder keg is palpable.

  • 23. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:29 am

    Speaking of real violence, how quickly the Left forgets….

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4660503.ece

  • 24. an800lbgorilla  |  January 9, 2011 at 9:28 am

    This is not an apology…

    R, you’ve let your hate of Palin completely cloud rational thought.

    You want guilt by association? Then every post you’ve written since Obama was President blaming someone else- Bush, GOP, Conservatives, ANYONE- is absolute bullshit. He’s the Pres, therefore EVERYTHING bad and good on his watch is tied to him. Period. And well, there hasn’t been a whole of good now has there…

    You were wrong to initially blame Palin for this. I pointed out to you how you’ve been wrong before about jumping to blame when something tragic like this happens. Once again you’ve demostrated an ability to not let little things like FACTS get in the way of you hyperbole.

    I asked for an apology and I’m still waiting…

  • 25. Meribeth  |  January 9, 2011 at 9:48 am

    good morning, everyone. I was curious what the reaction would be here.

    I don’t read Rutherford’s post to be so much anti-Palin as anti-violent rhetoric, of the sort in which Palin has, if not participated, skated right up to the line. And I agree with him. Perhaps my view is colored by my confessed lack of familiarity with or use of guns–I’m willing to accept that bias.

    I am not familiar enough with R’s writing to cite you to times when he says he would be equally upset/offended by a Democrat’s use of the same imagery, but have no reason not to believe him when he says he would. And I certainly would view the language that way, regardless of who used it.

    So, do I blame Palin for the shooting yesterday? No. BUT I do blame her, and many others, for contributing to an atmosphere that may (and please note I say “may”) have influenced an apparently disturbed individual. And I certainly think that Palin could help lessen that atmosphere by foregoing the language and by condemning its use in others.

    I dislike Palin (as much as one can dislike a person you have never met) and would like to explain why. One of the very first tapes out of her had her participating in a radio show in which the hosts were making fun of a cancer patient who had opposed Palin–and she was laughing and encouraging it. I would have had that negative reaction whether she’d been a Democrat or not even in political life. I have continued to find her distasteful–including up to this week when she remained silent about Ann Coulter’s use of the term “retard” that Palin had so condemned when used by Rahm Emmanuel.

    Back to R: I did not read his post as anything more than a strong disagreement with the rhetoric and a suggestion that the shooting be an opportunity to tone down/change/denounce the imagery. I didn’t watch Olbermann (and don’t) so I can’t speak to what he said. However, in my opinion, it’s an interesting and thought-provoking post and I see no hypocricy in it.

  • 26. Alfie  |  January 9, 2011 at 10:51 am

    I’ve been scarce but I have to sorta echo the thoughts previously stated.
    Rutherford demonstrates the typical castrated American who wants to allow symbolism to serve as an excuse for bad behavior or somehow be linked to it.
    If we all just don’t hint at bad words or thoughts we will be a better country. Well no we won’t. The energy wonks like Olbermann exert trying to link Palin or anyone on the Right to this incident or similiar incidents is nothing more than agenda with a dash of being a big pussy. Targeting a district in an election is in no way relatable to said elected official being whacked by a nut.
    If we have to be pussies for the World and pussies for mentally unbalanced folks here at home???!!! Shoot me now!!!

  • 27. poolman  |  January 9, 2011 at 11:10 am

    The nine year old girl, Christina Taylor Green, had just been elected to her school’s student council. A neighbor was going to Saturday’s event and invited her along because she thought she would enjoy it. Incidently, she was born on September 11, 2001.

    They are looking for an accomplice that supposedly showed up with Jared Loughner.

    This guy was mentally unstable, according to recent actions involving the community college and subsequent police run-ins last year. He tried getting into the army in 2008 but was denied. Yet he was able to buy a 9mm Glock on November 30 at a Sportsman’s Warehouse in Tucson. That part is scary to me.

    He definitely was after Giffords and called her by name, according to witnesses. He doesn’t appear to have any obvious associations with anything Palin or any one political party at this point. He does exhibit a strong distrust for government in general, though.

  • 28. Meribeth  |  January 9, 2011 at 11:34 am

    and Phelps group is going to picket the Green child’s funeral.

  • 29. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 12:40 pm

    The connection to Palin is made by Rutherford and those that would exploit this tragedy like Olbermann. It’s sick. The hate exhibited by Rutherford (and those he cites) towards Palin, Meribeth, is truly on another level; throughly intellectualized to represent something other than what it is — the manifestation and morphing of this author’s personal frustrations.

    For someone as intellegent as Rutherford, I see the projection of something as unrelated as Palin’s campaign such a stretch it troubles me.

    I have two little ones, including an 8 year old boy. The fact that a nine-year old girl died turned my stomach and breaks my heart. The fact that, in the admitted absence of a nexus, Rutherford chose this event to lecture everyone about Palin’s message and repeat the vitrole pukes Olbermann (and yes, consevative types like him do too) disgusts me.

    Was the fact that Gifford a guns rights activist or limited immigration type a contributing factor to the girl’s death Rutherford? If you’re not willing to say THAT, then STFU already.

    This post is Rutherford’s attempt to save face for being a dolt on this one. Any attempt to lend credence to it is pure, biased, sophistry.

    As someone with your obvious compassion, I am truly bothered by the direction you’ve taken on this one. It’s wrong headed.

  • 30. Meribeth  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    Thanks for your thoughts, Tigre–you make interesting points and I do have to confess to being swayed by the death of the little girl.

    What about Gifford’s opponent’s ad that, literally, spoke of firing the guns as a fundraiser? I am not saying he didn’t have the right to publish it but I do question the use of that sort of language and imagery.

    You raise good points about Gifford’s political views possibly being too “left” for the gunman–and it will be interesting to see how that plays out. But truly, I do worry about certain types of rhetoric inflaming unstable people, regardless of their political orientation.

    Perhaps I should calm down because I really am reacting to the little girl.

  • 31. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:16 pm

    Excellent comment El Tigre. Well put.

    And to MeriBeth. As you stage yourself with your passive aggressive condemnation of Sarah Palin, though you know absolutely nothing about the woman other than what you want to hear, answer me this, and try to explain to me why there is no hypocrisy in both this post and your statement.

    “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” ~ Barack Obama

    Has Obama’s vitriol raised the stakes? Has he created an atmosphere of hostility? If so, where’s your condemnation and why not the request, “Obama needs to line up every political adviser and public relations person currently in his employ who was working for him…

    AND FIRE THEM.”

    No, I’m afraid MeriBeth both you and Rutherford are showing an incredible amount of hypocrisy, but you mask it better than Rutherford. If a lunatic attacks a businessman, are we to blame Obama for vilifying the Chamber of Commerce? Was the attack on an Arkansas recruiting station the fault of anti-war liberal Democrats? The answer is no.

    The fact Palin or the Tea Party is even mentioned in the same breath as a lone madman shows the real intent – to take tragedy and misery and turn it into a political weapon.

    That is as wretched as it gets…Fred Phelps wretched.

  • 32. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    “You raise good points about Gifford’s political views possibly being too “left” for the gunman–and it will be interesting to see how that plays out.”

    I made no such point.

    My point was how ridiculous attempts to find a causal connection are. Admitting that none exists (that’s known), then going on about it as a response to a tragedy is intellectualy dishonest. I doubt seriously Rutherford would blame Gifford for the little girl’s death or attempt to use the the girl’s death a s springboard for some for an attack on Giffor’d satnce at this point. I know Rutherford wouldn’t have said a word if there were an “R” after Gifford’s name.

    Gifford is strongly in favor of guns rights. Why are you mentioning her opponent?

    This has nothing to do with Palin. It has to do with misguided efforts to validate one’s position (Rutherford) as the first response to a tragedy. It’s telling — and not in a good way.

  • 33. Meribeth  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    how about letting me answer before accusing me of hypocricy? I equally condemn the “we bring a gun” statement. And I am trying to make the point that the overheated rhetoric which substitutes for the debate on ideas (whether about the Chamber of Commerce or Health Care legislation) isn’t doing anyone any good.

    Tigre–sorry I misunderstood that point. My mistake.

    I realize Gifford is in favor of gun rights. I was asking if people felt her opponents ads were excessive.

  • 34. Meribeth  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    ‘opponent’s ads”–sorry.

  • 35. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:49 pm

    MeriBeth,

    Why is so hard for you to understand that this tragic episode has little or anything to do with “heated rhetoric”, and the fact the only heated rhetoric you or Rutherford ever recognize is if from the right flank?

    Double standards in judgment, or hypocrisy. Both are equally valid.

    You want to know what will be the national travesty of this awful affair that will affect all of us Meribeth? The loss of freedom, the overreaction, the cost associated with additional security, the lack of availability to our representatives due to stringent measures, etc…

    It will be the same reaction we had to a underwear bomber. Women and children being groped to board a plane which does nothing to make us safer, the call for more gun control which will further endanger innocent people, which will further incite hatred of government authority, which invariably leads to more hostility.

    MeriBeth, it is as simple as this. We have 308MM people in this nation. Out of that population, the chances are very good at least 3MM people could be considered clinically schizophrenic or clinically insane.

    Frankly, I’m surprised things like this don’t happen much more frequently. And people that fail to recognize that is the cost of freedom, and use this as political fodder make the situation all the more tragic.

    And this is why I am highly critical of Rutherford’s reaction. At a time we should all personally reflect and remain calm, many wish to inflame the rhetoric and raise the stakes. Instead of condemning the perpetrator, the Left yesterday looked to score political points by looking to cast blame. They quieted when they found out this nut didn’t fit the narrative, but you will never hear an apology.

    This is the Leftist version of Jerry Falwell after 9/11.

    Foolish…

  • 36. fakename2  |  January 9, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    It’s Giffords, not Gifford. I’ve said it before–this was not a political act, in that I don’t think this guy has two rational brain cells to rub together to come up with a political position. Yes there will always be crazies, and yes there will always be guns. I’ve personally owned guns in the past (handguns, in both cases) and just about everyone I know has one–or more. I believe in gun “rights”, but I also believe in gun CONTROL–who can have them, what type they are, how they are registered, etc.
    When we first heard the news, it was not the time to speculate, in my opinion, but now it is. If we were not discussing the level of political rhetoric and other issues like gun control at this time, then we would be completely tone-deaf. Read these words from, of all people, Bill Clinton:
    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/04/16/4430399-bill-clinton-words-matter

  • 37. Alfie  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:07 pm

    Tex excellent comment in #35

  • 38. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    We have gun control. Everyone already has to register a hand gun. And like dope, anyone with a few bucks is able to get around the rule.

    And time after time, in those places where the most stringent measures are taken, the banning of all hand guns, all control has done is increase the crime rate and weaken the law abiding populace.

    The only thing keeping everyone’s door from being kicked in, isn’t law enforcement. It’s the fear that hiding behind that front door, is a cocked gun pointed at the criminal’s head.

  • 39. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:17 pm

    Tex, agreed.

    I took a shower after my last comment and thought about what I had said.

    First, I might have jumped to a conclusion about Rutherford. Might have. Perhaps his response is more of a misguided effort to make sense of this (rather than something less flattering, i.e.e seeking validation, trying to score points, etc). Rutherford’s silence after following his responses from yesterday isn’t helping though. It sure looks to me like he doubled down on stupid.

    Second, I am bothered by Rutherford’s reaction BECAUSE he is an intelligent and compassionate individual (also leading to his greatest faults, but that’s for another day).

    Some here asked for an apology. Intitally I had the same reaction (“man, I hope he apologizes for his knee jerk reaction — how lame”). However, we don’t really want, nor are we owed “an apology.” It’s that we expect an “epiphany” that would necessarily cause Rutherford some regret for clouded judgement. There’s aparadox in this. The only reason any of us might think in terms of an “apology/epiphany” is because we feel a personal connection to Rutherford and value the motives (not substance) of his opinions (as misguided as they are politically).

    These last two days I feel dissapointed by what Rutherford has said. But I am confident that if it weren’t for our esteem, no one expressing their displeasure would’ve even bothered to do so.

  • 40. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:18 pm

  • 42. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    Rutherford, now that you know that Daily Kos put crosshairs on Giffords would you like to give him some of the same treatment today that you gave Sarah Palin yesterday?

  • 43. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:48 pm

    Of course, Rutherford will probably defend Kos by saying something like “The word ‘bulls eye’ is a lot different than a visual reference of one.”

    To which I will preemptively ask….what makes you the person that determines how a madman interprets things?

  • 44. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    Sorry, Tigre, but we part company on this one.

    I do want an apology.

    I don’t expect one, but I want one.

    Rutherford jumped on board the Crazy Train as it left the station yesterday, joining the unhinged calls laying the act of an insane loser at her feet, and trying very hard to see to it that the mud from the dropping there splashed up on her.

    When he is shown proof that the “irresponsible” targeting meme is a long-standing practice of Democrats and their supporters, who spent the day frantically scrubbing any such evidence from his website, he pretends at the existence of a nuance that makes verbal targeting and visual bullseyes ot “archery targets” a global quantum less irresponsible than the use of “crosshairs”.

    But what is worse is that in demonstrating the very mindless joiner type of activity that he pretends that this “crosshairs” exhibit is to inspire with the tweets and the irresponsible character assasination, which has helped to amp up real, individual threats against Mrs. Palin by other mindless joiners like himself, he assumes that Americans are incapable of exercising the responsibilty that comes with freedom, and the discernment. I’m not worried about the Palins. Not only do they have security, but they actually have taken the responsibilty neccessary to exercise their freedoms. I suspect if someone tries something against their family, they will fail and end up with a fatal case of lead poisoning…as it should be. But this constant fear of responsibility and what it requires that Rutherford, and his opinion deliverers at PMSNBC is a bigger threat to the Republic than a nutjob with a gun.

    I used to think that Rutherford was smart enough to see such truths when they were revealed to him. I can now see that I overestimated his cognitive abilities.

  • 45. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:13 pm

    “When we first heard the news, it was not the time to speculate, in my opinion, but now it is.”

    Now is the time to “speculate?” Who knew there was a time.

    Well, speculate away. Explain to us what you know about this incident and how the shooter’s actions are to blamed on someone else. It would also be helpful to explain why this would be a worthwhile dialogue, with the tragedy as a backdrop.

    I mean, I still can’t get over how the left’s heated rhetoric caused Hinckley to shoot Reagan and Brady. Just speculation of course, but I can only assume it’s time for that kind of speculation without any proof after all of these years.

    Again, Tex at #35 is right. This is pissing me off.

  • 46. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:15 pm

    Tigre,

    You’re right. I am hoping for a personal epiphany. Rutherford knows I like him, admire him, and at one time even respected most of his opinions, even when I did not necessarily agree. I mean that Rutherford.

    But this irrational Palin hatred in contemptible. MSNBC and their guest hosts quoted here are contemptible. Paul Krugman is contemptible.

    I would say the chances of having peace and a common bond in this country between the two sides, and all people are on one side or another whether they recognize it or not, are on par with Graychin and I becoming best of friends.

    Our country is now so fundamentally flawed, the hatred so intense from both sides and I certainly don’t exclude myself from the blame, it pains me to say this:

    I don’t see anyway out of the dilemma besides learning to separate ourselves. And I shudder to think what it would take to do that.

  • 47. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:18 pm

    Put you beverages down and swallow. Then read this.

    http://www.slate.com/id/2280616/pagenum/all/#add-comment

    The fact that this actually was published in Slate astounds me. They haven’t actually distinguished themselves by getting it in the past.

    Never fear, however. Their readers have shown themselves to be more resilient to this shot of intellectual sunshine.

  • 48. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    Fair enough, BiW. Although I doubt Rutherford serves as much of an inspiration through his tweets, he is a part of something and apparently decided to join in. Until now, I too didn’t think Rutherford capable of such an asinine approach to this (the ones joining him, of course, hardly surprise — I can only imagine what G-chin and Yellowdog might have already accomplished).

    Perhaps it’s cognitive dissonance. But I am trying to think better of Rutherford on this one. I really am. I would I least like to see him affected by what is being said here about him. Based on his response to Rabbit, I am not encouraged. And I will follow Rabbit out of here permanently too if there’s no more going on than what it appears. That’s because I will have learned that Rutherford is not the individual I believed him to be and I do not care to make company with him.

    If Rutherford’s response is to tell me “good riddance” too, then so be it. I’ll join in at your blog. And that ain’t’ taking my bat and ball and going home. It’s the natural consequence of seeing the emporer naked (and with a mighty small penis to boot). I will not wish to participate.

  • 49. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    Personally, I don’t see why everyone is so shocked at Rutherford’s response. We all know how far his IQ drops when he sees the words “Sarah Palin.” They are his kryptonite.

    It has been that way from the day John McCain first spoke them.

  • 51. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    We all know how far his IQ drops when he sees the words “Sarah Palin.” They are his kryptonite.

    Agreed Huck, but what surprised me was that we even read the words “Sarah Palin.”

  • 52. fakename2  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    Tigre…talk about dishonest and disingenuous. I’m not speculating on any of the facts. Nor did I say anything about left v. right But it’s a fair time to ask some questions about rhetoric in this country, WHETHER OR NOT IT CONTRIBUTED to this guy’s actions. Everyone else seems to be talking and thinking about it, but I guess you and your soulmates are immune to that sort of thing. Really…this is like the playground. You started it. No, you started it. Well you did it too. It’s just obnoxious and willfully argumentative.

  • 53. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:02 pm

    “But it’s a fair time to ask some questions about rhetoric in this country.”

    Why?

  • 54. poolman  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:02 pm

    I think what bugs me the most about this right now is the fact that this guy was able to legally obtain a handgun. Especially given that he had prior run-ins with the law, even an arrest. He was booted out of community college and told not to come back until he had a mental health official state he was mentally stable. Then he goes and buys a handgun at a sporting goods store. That just doesn’t set right with me. Not that he couldn’t have been able to obtain a gun otherwise, but was able to do it legally.

    Crosshairs on a person is different from a bullseye on a state or district, IMHO. I don’t know where one would draw the line here, but it still hasn’t been proven that this had ANY bearing on the incident. The fact that death threats increased threefold SINCE it was posted IS a valid point. The fact that it was pulled down immediately after this incident DOES speak volumes. If it was purely innocent and could be defended as such, who decided to pull it down from the web and why?

    Thanks for the link to Clinton’s statement, fakename. I do think it is valid. I think a lot of the reason Palin is getting pulled into this, aside from the crosshairs post, is her “reload” statement and her past tolerance of death threats against her political opponents at her rallies. She isn’t the only one, but is probably the most memorable.

    I think the choice of words do have consequences. I don’t think they need to be censored, but I feel those who say them are accountable for what they incite. If you are a public figure and your words and actions will be heard by many, then you need to take that into account and own up to it. Words evoke emotion, as they were intended. They are rarely innocently spoken by public figures. We have control over our tongues, or we should. Mean what you say, and say what you mean.

  • 55. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:03 pm

    And I was just quoting you. So cut the crap.

    Willfully argumentative. Got a mirror?

  • 56. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    I think what bugs me the most about this right now is the fact that this guy was able to legally obtain a handgun. Especially given that he had prior run-ins with the law, even an arrest.

    Do we know that it was legally obtained?

    The next question would be “when”? Was it legally obtained before any of his run ins with the law?

    Did his run ins involve convictions that would make him inelligible to own a firearm?

  • 57. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:08 pm

    FN, don’t bother responding. I don’t care to debate with you. You’re approaching this from a different angle. You’re not even attempting to understand the dialogue. That’s clear from your comment about “left v. right.” You might want to reread what I said and see if you can understand the reason it was said (hint: it’s the absurdity of it).

  • 58. fakename2  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:24 pm

    Thanks a lot for the pass, Tigre. The gun was obtained in November of 2010 from a sporting goods store. One assumes that was “legal”. It was attained after he went through a diversion program for possession of drug paraphernalia (marijuana), but he’s had other contacts related to threats. As for eligibilty…don’t know. This is Arizona, after all.
    My source: the Pima County Sheriff and the FBI as seen on Fox News.

  • 59. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    Everyone else seems to be talking and thinking about it, but I guess you and your soulmates are immune to that sort of thing. Really…this is like the playground. You started it. No, you started it. Well you did it too. It’s just obnoxious and willfully argumentative.

    No. I take umberage at the willful character assasination and complete failure to demand apologies from others of the author’s political persuasion who are EQUALLY GUILTY of the exact same offense.

    I am also fed up with the idea that someone has to be “held accountable” for the actions of a loon who is a handful of nuts shy of a Payday Bar. Is PMSNBC accountable for the busloads of angry and violent people who showed up in the neighborhoods of AIG executives, and in some cases who broke into the executive’s homes and caused their children to lock themselves into bathrooms and hide? By the same “logic” employed by our esteemed host, they ought to be, but I don’t recall his outrage over that. The finger-wagging sermons posts on that seem conspicously absent.

    Instead, the current vogue is to studiously ignore the double-standard under the current controversy that everyone “is talking and thinking about”. If there is a problem with the “thinking”, it is that for “most people”, it does not probe nearly deep enough or hard enough into ALL aspects of the issue to end up being more than a convenient condemnation of one philosophy or outlook. And when people think in such a shallow fashion as they rush to “do something about it” as a means to make themselves feel better, they allow their emotions to lead them to make bad decisions and bad law.

    I’m sorry if the reminders of the double-standard being employed bother you. I’m sorry if the hand-wringing over the “accountablity” for the things said overshadows the accountability for the person(s) acting upon them has led many like me to draw a line in the sand and refuse to be bullied, or allow the bullying of others without a defense based on a visceral emotional response that swallows any meaningful reflection on the deeper intellectual repercussions of such actions, but this really has gotten to the point were it is far too much to allow to continue unabated. The right didn’t bring us alone to this point, there is ample assistance from the left, and if there is any guilt by association to be doled out, then it MUST be claimed in equal measure by the left if they ever intend to be taken seriously by serious people ever again…and that starts with EQUAL condemnation, and naming of names other than Sarah Palin.

  • 60. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    I think a lot of the reason Palin is getting pulled into this, aside from the crosshairs post, is her “reload” statement and her past tolerance of death threats against her political opponents at her rallies. She isn’t the only one, but is probably the most memorable.

    I think the reason Sarah Palin is “getting pulled into this”, is because of irrational hatred and distraction to mask the unwillingness of the supporters to admit the current administration failures, and personal insecurities – almost to the point of schizophrenic paranoia; smitten with a caricature. And the malady is across the Leftist spectrum which has spread like a virus affecting almost all of you. There is no vaccine or cure, as the disease a mental illness.

    Poolman, why not the condemnation of Obama when he stated, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”

    or

    Obama referring to Republicans as “enemies” in the last election?

    Again, double standards and hypocrisy on display.

    Political rhetoric had little or nothing to do with this. The gun hadn’t even cooled before you clowns had picked your perfect and most hated accomplice – Sarah Palin.

    If it weren’t a tragedy and there was not a danger in ignoring the baseless charges, I’d laugh at the inanity of the claims.

  • 61. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    Any of you sportsman know if they actually sell extended clips in a sporting goods store?

  • 62. fakename2  |  January 9, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    Understood, BiW. Now if you will point me in the driection of another former VP candidate, who holds enormous sway over a portion of the electorate, and who used the imagery of a rifle scope targeting candidates for office, I’ll condemn them equally.
    On one of these posts, someone said “politics is messy”. This is beyond messy.

  • 63. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    Understood, BiW. Now if you will point me in the driection of another former VP candidate, who holds enormous sway over a portion of the electorate, and who used the imagery of a rifle scope targeting candidates for office, I’ll condemn them equally.

    I’m sorry. The Democratic Leadership Conventions’ Targets don’t count? The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s (led by Chris Van Holland) targets don’t count?

    The lengths to which Rutherford and others seek to distinguish those from Palin’s really are disingenuous. “One has crosshairs” and therefore it is clearly “unacceptable” while the others are? Much as it would pain the gunfearing wussies of the left, people with the right training and a bow and arrow can kill someone just as dead as they can with a firearm, and with less noise or need to break cover, so the whole “but it’s an archery target/bullseye” meme is a distinction without difference.

    Or, if I were to accept the ridiculous premise that the crosshairs really were different, then is OBAMA accountable…after all, the DCCC’s targets were posted first, so didn’t Palin such follow his advice and bring a gun to a knife fight?

    And I noticed that you didn’t answer my question about PMSNBC’s culpability. After the demagoguery and vitriol they leveled against the AIG execs and “the rich” in general, who were and are private citizens, shouldn’t they be accountable? When will we hear the ringing condemnation of their heated rhetoric, which cannot even be said to be on the same level, since it concerns people who did nothing more than what they contracted privately to do, and did not step forward and inject themselves into the controversy of national politics?

  • 64. poolman  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:07 pm

    Tex, regarding Obama’s knife/gun statement, what was it in reference to? Are you sure it wasn’t the “bring a knife to a gunfight” analogy? Threats against life from any political party are not acceptable to me, even if in jest.

    As for the “enemies” statement, do you have a reference for that? I clearly recall Obama death threats at Palin rallies. McCain had the decency to call them out when they occurred in his rallies, but Palin did not. I remember the criticism of that back then.

    As to extended clips at sporting goods stores, I have no idea. I only read the report that says he purchased the gun Nov 30th last year. I don’t know how long the approval process is and whether that was before the 30th or after. I have plenty of friends that do guns, but I have no experience personally with gun purchases in Arizona. I don’t know what he was arrested for in the past, nor why the army did not accept him. I do know the college thought he was mentally unstable, per a report.

  • 65. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:26 pm

    Everyone already has to register a hand gun.

    Bull … Arizona if I’m not mistaken allows concealed weapons to be carried without a permit.

  • 66. Alfie  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:32 pm

    You are correct Rutherford…what is your point? It also has laws that the mentally unbalanced are some of those that shouldn’t be able to legally procure firearms.
    Are we now shifting focus unto a failure of government?

  • 67. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    Bull … Arizona if I’m not mistaken allows concealed weapons to be carried without a permit.

    True, however, to lawfully purchase a handgun, he would have to go through a background check and federally mandated waiting period.

  • 68. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, “We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,”

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/4993-obama-calls-his-critics-qenemiesq

  • 69. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:37 pm

    Thank you BIC for correcting an idiot that wouldn’t know the dangerous end of a gun. :wink:

  • 70. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:43 pm

    In response to Poolman’s comment …. I saw a nitwit AZ congressman on Meet the Press today minimize nutbjob carrying a 9MM Glok because it’s the same gun issued to many policemen. WTF???? So because police carry guns, every Tom Dick and Harry should carry one too?

    But of course, yesterday’s event brings up a host of issues Conservatives don’t want to discuss, like responsible speech and gun control.

    More on some of the other comments later.

  • 71. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:45 pm

    Obama referring to Republicans as “enemies” in the last election?

    I condemned that at the time … either here or on my internet radio show.

  • 72. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    I hope you don’t mind that, being you seem to be ignoring all the obvious disconnects and inconsistencies Mr. LAWSON.

    You’re making an ass of yourself. You really want to be remembered as unhinged?

  • 73. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:49 pm

    Regarding “PMSNBC” when the AZ sheriff made his remarks two people I immediately thought of were KO and Ed Schultz. I think that is why KO issued an apology last night for inflammatory language that he did use back in the day.

  • 74. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:52 pm

    Tex, BiW didn’t address the issue of carrying the gun. You are the idiot he corrected. You don’t need a permit to carry. You said you did. You were wrong.

    Thank you.

  • 75. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    “But of course, yesterday’s event brings up a host of issues Conservatives don’t want to discuss, like responsible speech and gun control.”

    Ah yes. Yesterday’s events were perfect for bringing this up Rutherford and tying it to Palin. We will all see that it was well thought out and well intentioned attempt to create dialogue — like your blog radio program today.

    Here comes the lecture about “responsible speech” from one engaged in the opposite.

  • 76. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2011 at 5:59 pm

    Before I give a more complete response to some of the comments, let me say this. If Sarah Palin is a compassionate decent woman, then she had a sick feeling in her stomach yesterday and she had some regret about those crosshairs, regardless of their influence on the killer.

    And Tex, I’ll give you a very real personal example to help you understand where I think Sarah’s head should be right now. In the immediate aftermath of Hippie Professor’s death, you made comments on his blog that not only suggested that you missed him and you were in grief but you also regretted some of your over the top rhetoric while he was alive. Did you kill him? Of course not. But you’re a decent guy and you’d like to think you’ve added some light to people’s lives and not darkness. (Incidentally, I don’t think HP was the worse for wear for having sparred with you.)

    With those crosshairs, Sarah left the world a bit darker than it was before and when we look at all the folks who touched Gabby Giffords’ life positively over the years, Sarah ain’t among them.

    I don’t mean this as a personal insult to you. I mean it to bring the issue down to Earth.

  • 77. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 6:08 pm

    I said “register”, not carry a concealed weapon. You’ re still wrong and still don’t know what you’re talking about in your state of frustration.

    You buy a hand gun from a licensed dealer and they register the serial number and call in a background check. That is exactly what I’m reading this guy did.

    Good grief – you copied my damn statement and still are misconstruing what I said.

    I’m telling you as a friend. You need to seek a little counseling. This made up caricature of Palin being the devil is clearly delusion and you’re losing it.

  • 78. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 9, 2011 at 6:15 pm

    How should Kos feel today, Rutherford?

  • 79. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 6:18 pm

    In response to Poolman’s comment …. I saw a nitwit AZ congressman on Meet the Press today minimize nutbjob carrying a 9MM Glok because it’s the same gun issued to many policemen. WTF???? So because police carry guns, every Tom Dick and Harry should carry one too?

    I’m sorry, what is so objectionable about a 9mm Glock?

    As far as stopping power goes, there are others that I could LEGALLY purchase with considerably more, although they would not necessarily combine as much capacity for comparable weight and size.

    The reason most police departments have gone to 9mm is not because they are necessarily “more” deadly than other handguns, but usually has more to do with cost, both of the weapon, and ammunition, and for magazine capacity, which will hold more bullets than a standard revolver.

    You’ve expressed your feelings about firearms before, R. you are a gun fearing wussie, who refuses to take primary responsibility for ensuring the safety of yourself and your family, chosing instead to rely soley on that which is provided by people who may or may not be close enough to respond to a tragedy in the making in a timely fashion, and given some of your past statements about police and race, you arguably have reason to believe that they will not perform their duty to protect you with the same vigor that they might someone of lessor melanin content. Fine. We get that. But your irrational fear does not give you, or anyone else the right to decide that I, or anyone else here to have that right for themself. You don’t get to decide what caliber is “too big”, you don’t get to decide that six shots is enough, you don’t get to decide which brand is “appropriate’ for the exercise of my right to defend myself. You don’t want to be a man, and choose to solely rely on others for your security? Fine. Cower in the corner whenever something happens, and the rest of us will let you know when it is safe to come out, but you don’t get to decide that something is bad or pointless for everyone else based upon your fears.

  • 80. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 6:28 pm

    With those crosshairs, Sarah left the world a bit darker

    Oh fer chrissakes, you’re hopeless.

    Your passive-agressive “She didn’t do it, and he was a nut, but she is still guilty by association and no one else is similarly culpable because she is who she is and those other people aren’t as influential or didn’t do the exact same thing” bit is transparent.

    If she feels sick to her stomach today, it should be out a a realization that people like yourself are beyond hope, and will gladly associate her and her alone with a tragedy that was entirely of a nutbar’s own making, and that because of your willingness to do so, and that of the KOSTARDS and the PMSNBC zombies, she and her family have a very real uptake in threats against them personally from people of a certain political persuasion who have been all to eager to engage in politically motivated violence in the past while projecting their worst impulses on those who didn’t. If she feels sick today, it is because this is much more likely to mean that someone will lose their life, perhaps making an attempt on hers, because you and people like you couldn’t wait to splash her with Giffords’ blood.

  • 81. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 9:19 pm

    So Rutherford,

    You going to listen to the one fair Republican you love to quote? Or is only when Frum agrees with you that he is geniune?

    Conservatives have been quick to repudiate – to brand as offensive and disgusting – any suggestion that the Tucson shooting was somehow inspired by the extreme anti-Obama political rhetoric of the past 2 years.

    In this, conservatives have the facts on their side. By all reports, the Tucson shooter was a very mentally disturbed person. Even if Jared Lee Loughner was aware that Sarah Palin’s PAC had posted a gun sight next to Congresswoman Gifford’s name, that awareness cannot be translated into a motivation. It makes no sense to talk of the “motive” of someone who is fundamentally irrational.

    That point should be acknowledged, accepted, and internalized.

  • 82. Gunsniper  |  January 9, 2011 at 9:35 pm

    Mr. Rutherford

    Please demonstrate how a political graphic using registration marks actually contributed to this wanton act of murder.

  • 83. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 9:53 pm

    Rutherford, did you just tie Tex’s comments to HP’s death like you did Palin’s to the shooting? Are you kidding me? Keeeeep stretching. . .

    I guess we’ll be holding you responsible in the event something happens to Palin (or Tex for that matter). Or we can just talk about it then without admitting the inference, right?

  • 84. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 9:59 pm

    As the World Turns, Rutherford’s thick head is starting swell…the cranial pressure grows more intense. :wink:

    The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel

    Those who purport to care about the tenor of political discourse don’t help civil debate when they seize on any pretext to call their political opponents accomplices to murder.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071913818696964.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

  • 85. Tex Taylor  |  January 9, 2011 at 10:02 pm

    The pressure expands and the Lawson Head grows larger…from the insufferably bland David Frum – one Republican always quoted here as moderate and decent. Uh oh…

    I don’t see this as a particular moment to reflect on ‘extreme political rhetoric,’ since there’s nothing to connect political rhetoric from either side of the political spectrum to this crime. I wouldn’t even call for reflection on the continued sales of Mein Kampf or The Communist Manifesto, even though the suspect credits both of these as among his favorites, as they have no causal connection to the actions of a lunatic. Perhaps, though, this is a good moment to reflect on those who rush to exploit tragedy in an attempt to bully political activists into silence.”

  • 86. El Tigre  |  January 9, 2011 at 10:06 pm

    Tex, that link is dead on. Well, it really is restating everyhting we’ve said. How long will Rutherford cling to it?

  • 87. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 9, 2011 at 10:30 pm

    Meanwhile, an actual Congressmen decides to demonstrate his Constitutional ignorance and threaten the speech of ALL:

    http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/and-so-it-begins/

  • 88. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:40 am

    Before going to bed I’m gonna take one more stab at my thought process over the past day. It may help, it may not.

    Right after I heard about the shooting, I checked to see what was going on in Twitter land and I saw tweets about Palin. I already knew about the crosshairs … I didn’t like it back when it happened. So the tweets didn’t particularly move me until I saw a couple that got me going. First some tweets saying she was scrubbing her web site. If the campaign ad was not in poor taste, why not leave it in place? Why the sudden cleanup? Then I hear she’s offering condolences on Facebook of all places.

    The woman has at least 200 reporters who would LOVE to get a statement from her and carry it, but her disdain for the lamesteam media moves her to offer her thoughts on Facebook. I’m sorry, Facebook is not the venue for a serious public figure to offer commentary on a tragedy, particularly when her association with the victim was not a friendly one.

    So in terms of my Tweet, yes I lost it. As I’ve said before, what i tweeted paled in comparison to what some others have tweeted.

    I knew at that point I would write a post, The more I thought about it (particularly taking into account my premature attacks with the IRS worker, etc.) there was no way I was writing a post tying nutjob’s act directly to Sarah. However the one thing that did occur to me was why would Mrs. Palin want her name to come up on a tragic day like yesterday? Not unless she is some sort of masochistic fool. Say what you like about those who brought her name up (including me), it was inevitable and would not have happened had she refrained from the violent reference in the first place.

    So bottom line, I decided to assume she’s too stupid to understand tastelessness when she sees it and that it was up to her staff to save her from the heat she got yesterday. They failed.

    I am not saying Sarah caused the shooting. I didn’t say that in the Tweet either. I didn’t say it on the “radio” today either. What I am saying is that she is a mean spirited woman who throws Molotov cocktails around carelessly and then deservedly looks bad when bad things happen that remind us of her cocktail throw. The fact that her staff raced to scrub the web site is 100% proof that they knew they were in a PR nightmare of their own creation.

    Huck probably said one of the sanest things in this thread. Palin hits all my buttons. Yesterday was certainly no exception. While my reactions trouble many of you, your utter refusal to admit the wrongness of Palin’s approach troubles me. And the kindergarten response of Kos does it too, is no substitute for saying Palin plays with fire and doesn’t give a damn about it.

  • 89. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:45 am

    This is the most inane drivel written by a supposedly intelligent man I’ve ever read.

    Is this what you have finally come to?

    MCPO, welcome.

    You didn’t visit here ignorant of my reputation. I’m known (and disliked) at the Hostages and you’ve probably seen me over at BiW’s. Did you really expect “an open letter to Sarah Palin” to be a love letter, based on what you already know about my politics?

    Would be more helpful to get more than “inane drivel”. Doesn’t really tell me that you even read the article.

  • 90. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:50 am

    Mr. Rutherford

    Please demonstrate how a political graphic using registration marks actually contributed to this wanton act of murder.

    Gunsniper, welcome to the blog.

    I never said in this article that there was a contribution. On the contrary, I said we don’t know why this nutjob did what he did. That wasn’t the point. Feel free to read through my statement and restatement and restatement of my position in the comments thread.

  • 91. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:05 am

    And still not a word about the other instances of “targeting” politicians….

  • 92. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 3:21 am

    One other thing before I put this to rest Rutherford. You’re always making accusation of religious nut jobs and theocracy. Always bringing up George Tiller as example of the evil influence of religion on some.

    Like McVeigh, it worth noting to you that Loughner was a “devout” atheist.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110110/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot_gunman_11

    I do hope that helps to alleviate some of your religious bigotry.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110110/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot_gunman_11

  • 93. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 3:26 am

    Offered without comment.

    http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y293/JimHunt81/Palin.jpg

  • 94. an800lbgorilla  |  January 10, 2011 at 8:09 am

  • 95. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 10:18 am

    The reports are that the shooter was a “left wing” nut. Yet MSNBC runs with an attack on Palin and you get whipped into a frenzy.

    There is absolutely nothing virtuous about seizing on a tragedy like this to try to score cheap political points. Nothing. It is sickening. Even after you had an opportunity to reflect, you spent your time parroting it on your “radio” program.

    Rutherford, your indignation is so strange. Saying over and over, “I never said she caused the shooting,” then insisting that we all acknowledge that there’s a connection with the event? None of your conservative friends here is stupid enough to follow you into that hole. It’s insulting to think any of us would.

    I don’t like Palin much at all. However, you’ve got a perverse hatred. A mean, irrational, boiling contempt. I worry about you.

    So the tweets set you off. Do you realize that YOU sound like the next shooter?

    It is you, Rutherford, that is fueled by inflammatory rhetoric and commentary from those on the vile left — many of which broadcast daily on MSNBC that you cite with tireless repetition. It is not “[our] utter refusal to admit the wrongness of Palin’s approach [that should trouble you].” The attack is consistent, and it is against your abject lack of judgment in making the connection between Palin and this tragedy. It is YOUR failure to admit the wrongness (and mean it) that is troubling. Nobody’s buying your rationalization — and I suspect you really aren’t either.

  • 96. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:05 am

    LOL Tex, I wondered how long it would take you to remind me that coocoobird was an atheist. You’re slipping … a full 48 hours after the incident. ;-)

  • 97. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:11 am

    Offered without comment.

    Real shame BiW, you should have commented. Having not commented, I have to assume you don’t understand the graphic you linked to. It was criticizing her for her violent imagery and rhetoric. The context was different from that used on the “Palin map”.

    I guess you believe the Palin folks who now say that was never intended to be a rifle scope crosshair …. it was a surveyer’s scope.

  • 98. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:17 am

    I picture your house Rutherford looking something like this on Halloween…

    http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/29/palin.noose/

    Face it Jackson. On this one, you let your irrational hatred of a woman you don’t know make you look like an idiot. Embarrassingly bad…

    Like I said. I don’t think liberals have a sense of shame so I don’t hold much hope.

  • 99. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:23 am

    A fair assessment worth reading.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/us/politics/09bai.html

  • 100. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:24 am

    Like I said. Liberals/Progressives have no sense of shame – an obvious mental illness.

    http://biggovernment.com/wthuston/2011/01/09/unbelievable-democrat-group-using-giffords-shooting-for-fundraiser/

  • 101. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:28 am

    Strange at the NYT – typical, but strange.

    Big emphasis on “right-wing” extremists, but he didn’t bother to mention a leftist federal government that fried about 70 people at a place called Waco, including women and children.

    Hardly a fair assessment. :roll:

  • 102. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:37 am

    Here’s a far more fair assessment that takes your ilk to task Rutherford. And a killer line. :lol:

    It doesn’t take a genius to know that foreign leaders continually size up their enemies. It doesn’t take a genius either to know who is getting the better of whom at this particular moment on the world stage. Obama has been sized up as a wimp. He can pull out thuggish-sounding rhetoric about kicking someone’s *ss or going into “hand-to-hand combat” with congressional Republicans all he wants, but everyone past the third grade sees through all that to the guy whose “empathy” outshines his genuine toughness in every arena.

    No one would ever need to ask whether Palin was up to the task of getting tough with rogue regimes, terrorists, or treaty negotiations. At the very least, Palin has made it abundantly clear that she would never be photographed in flip-flops with a slurpee or all shriveled up and bony in an oversized Nike get-up or on a pansy bike in a helmet. Impressions count and Palin knows that full well. Nowhere do impressions count more than with enemies who would do us harm in a heartbeat whenever they feel emboldened by demonstrated weakness.

  • 103. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:38 am

    From a feminist, mind you.

    The link:

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/a-feminist-look-at-palins-military-jargon/

  • 104. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:51 am

    Clearly, Obama has created an environment of violence and charged political rhetoric…

    Look who is talking

    ** Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”
    ** Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
    ** Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
    ** Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
    ** Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“
    ** Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
    ** Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
    ** Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”
    ** Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”

  • 106. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:30 pm

    Let’s take a gander at what Rutherford considers “fair.”

    The article makes sure to mention these goodies…

    “Consider the comments of Sharron Angle, the Tea Party favorite who unsuccessfully ran against Harry Reid for the Senate in Nevada last year. She talked about “domestic enemies…”

    “Then there’s Rick Barber, a Republican who lost his primary in a Congressional race in Alabama, but not before airing an ad in which someone dressed as George Washington listened to an attack on the Obama agenda and gravely proclaimed, “Gather your armies.

    Of course, both are Republicans.

    Yet Obama get a pass for his many references of violent imagery, such as those that Tex posted above.

    Also ignored is the campaign video I posted up at comment #40.

    It tells scary stories about conservatives supposedly calling for revolution….

    “In fact, much of the message among Republicans last year, as they sought to exploit the Tea Party phenomenon, centered — like the Tea Party moniker itself — on this imagery of armed revolution.”

    But ignores things like this….

    Of course, it can’t put any quotes around the words “armed revolution,” because nobody actually said them. Still, it goes ahead and uses them because they sound good….and fair, according to some people.

    But it is not surprising that Rutherford thinks this hypocrisy is fair. After all, he has a dead link to a web site called “Ideas and Revolution,” and never thought twice about it.

    No, Rutherford. That piece is not any more fair about this topic than you have been. Like you, the NYT has decided not to let this tragedy go to waste, opting instead to exploit it as a vehicle to put forth political rhetoric.

    You should both be ashamed. But we all know how that’s going to go, don’t we?….

  • 107. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:35 pm

    #98 … Tex if that isn’t melodrama I don’t know what is. I don’t want any physical harm to come to the woman. I’d just be happy if her political future came to an abrupt end.

  • 108. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:36 pm

    Does Palin want to be Reagan or Limbaugh? Now is the time to decide.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47351.html

  • 109. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    The left is now begun circulating a fake voter registration for Loughner claiming he is a republican. Couldn’t even wait for all of the bodies to be carted off before starting the old Dan Rather routine.

    http://truebluenz.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/left-post-fake-jared-loughner-republican-voter-registration/?like=1

    (give it a google for more. the libs were touting this with Rutherford-level proof).

  • 110. an800lbgorilla  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    You just can’t let go of Palin can you?

  • 111. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:48 pm

    “Does Palin want to be Reagan or Limbaugh? Now is the time to decide.”

    Oh wonderful. The tragedy viewed as a “victory” for the libs? Glad the dead and their families proved so useful to the liberal agenda.

  • 112. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    99 “a fair assesment?” Gimme a break.

    Didn’t Obama refer to the right as “the enemy” not even 6 months ago?

  • 113. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    Real shame BiW, you should have commented. Having not commented, I have to assume you don’t understand the graphic you linked to. It was criticizing her for her violent imagery and rhetoric. The context was different from that used on the “Palin map”.

    Real shame, Rutherford.

    You had a chance to show a modicum of consistency in your OUTRAGE!!!111!, and instead went down the “it isn’t wrong when we “progressives” do it ’cause we’re just making a point.” road.

    Consider it a test. You failed, BTW.

    And as for this:

    I don’t want any physical harm to come to the woman.

    Of course not. And her use of crosshairs “darkened the world”, but the good “progressive” use of them is making it a brighter place, right?

    Until I’d witnessed it, I wouldn’t have thought it possible to “lean forward” so for that your head gets firmly planted in your ass. Good job for showing me something I’d never seen before.

    I’d just be happy if her political future came to an abrupt end.

    And we’ve told you how that can happen before. Quit making her the focus of all your rage and angst, and you’ll find that she won’t be the figure you and yours keep building her into.

  • 114. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 12:58 pm

    “You just can’t let go of Palin can you?”

    Huck, it’s all of those hopes and feams rather than meanness that guide the left. Remember?

    Now my question is, was the 9 year-old girl a conservative or liberal?

  • 115. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    “dreams”

  • 116. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:02 pm

    BiW: Yep. It’s now turned to gloating. Amazing isn’t it?

  • 117. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:06 pm

    Tell me again about the right’s hate, Rutherford.

    Go ahead, convince me that even a quarter of this normal, healthy dialogue worthy of “civil” debate in return.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

    Tell me how Palin crossed a line of propriety and civility and how “concerned” you are that we just don’t see it your way.

    Tell me. TELL ME. Tell me how it is the right that is “violent and deranged”, but if your going to bitterly cling to that narrative, then you better OWN THIS. NAME IT AND CLAIM IT, or issue a real apology and then shut the Hell up about Sarah Palin.

  • 118. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:10 pm

    Look at Rutherford’s violent rhetoric…

    Here…

    “Obama’s unwillingness to put the GOP up against the wall…”

    Here…

    “I seriously doubt we will see another ad as effective as Jerry Brown’s latest knock out punch. ”

    Here…

    “Talk Smack and Get Smacked

    And I am confident the list could go on and on.

    Rutherford, how bad would you feel if I went and smacked Gen. McCrystal? How much would your gut hurt if G went and literally knocked out Meg Whitman? And what if some Republicans were put up against a wall and, say….shot? Would you take even 3 seconds way from your PDS to reflect on those things the way you expect her to do?

  • 119. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:16 pm

    You can forget Rutherford commenting on #117, BIW. He refuses to acknowledge any instance of violent rhetoric that doesn’t come from the right.

    He completely ignores it, and, in turn, accepts and condones it.

  • 120. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    Still waiting on a comment regarding my #40, Rutherford. Why are you ignoring it?

  • 121. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    Huck…that’s different. That guy isn’t a former VP candidate with conservative leanings…its different doncha know?

  • 122. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    And Rutherford continues to tweet. . .

  • 123. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:49 pm

    Another great message from someone you guys hate.

    http://www.frumforum.com/what-palin-needed-to-say-after-giffords-shooting

  • 124. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:54 pm

    Here’s a message from someone you’re exploiting:

  • 125. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    Do I have to write a post on what the leaders of the left needed to say after some good progressives made a likeness of Palin in the crosshairs after all the Left’s outrage!!!111!!! that she would use such an image? Is that what it would take to make you see the glass house surrounding you as you fling stone after stone? Or do I well and truly write you off as a hopeless case, forever picking at the scab on soul, and cursing the object of your unhealthy attentions for it not getting better?

  • 126. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    Nowhere do impressions count more than with enemies

    Well you’ve got me there. If she’s willing to point a metaphorical gun at fellow Americans (while pointing literal guns at wildlife on TV) then who knows what she’d do to foreign enemies if given half the chance.

    Yes, that’s the leader I want … someone who inspires fear. (One would think you learned something from Bush’s cowboy years … alas not.)

  • 127. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:00 pm

    I know I’ve touched a nerve when Gorilla resorts to citing WeaselZippers. And I thought the days of Elric were over. :neutral:

  • 128. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:06 pm

    “Well you’ve got me there. If she’s willing to point a metaphorical gun at fellow Americans (while pointing literal guns at wildlife on TV) then who knows what she’d do to foreign enemies if given half the chance.”

    She may just do exactly what you were calling for Obama to do less than 2 weeks ago!

    WAKE THE FUCK UP, MAN!!!!

  • 129. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    G, where did Kerry get this health care bill connection to nutjob? I’d like to see it. I’ll google it later.

  • 130. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:10 pm

    Huck “Ideas and Revolution” was hardly about revolution. It was a typical lib blog by MJ Revolting Pawn (or revolting puke as Tex used to call him). I didn’t realize the site had died. I need to do some cleanup on my blogroll.

  • 131. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:12 pm

    You just can’t let go of Palin can you?

    This thread is about Palin. Your point?

  • 132. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:16 pm

    “Huck “Ideas and Revolution” was hardly about revolution.”

    Yes, I am well aware what it was. So what?

    Palin’s crosshairs were hardly about shooting someone but that hasn’t stopped you from going on about it for the last 3 days, has it?

  • 133. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:17 pm

    Rutherford, what about #40?

    You sure seem to want to ignore that ad. Why?

  • 134. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:20 pm

    Oh wonderful. The tragedy viewed as a “victory” for the libs?

    Did you read the article? One thing is for sure. You guys care as little for Palin as I do because if you actually liked her, you would also be analyzing where does she go from here?

    Folks less full of vitriol than I are all saying this is a time for Palin to show what kind of leader she is and how she behaves in the face of an attack (deserved or otherwise).

    And that of course gets back to the root of this piece you’ve all gone ape over — the Palin machine is so blind to what effect she has on a sizable part of the population, that they just don’t care. Appearances be damned. Let’s go on the defense. Let’s pretend a gunsight is a survey icon.

    I know you guys find my so called “Palin obsession” disturbing but never have I seen such a disconnect with reality on your part. I have been posting links from reasonable voices, not screamers … not obsessives, and they get equally dismissed by you.

    Do me a favor … someone actually answer what I wrote with an alternative. In light of this unfair attack on her, what should be her next move? Play Palin advisor for two seconds and let’s see if you can do better than her gang does.

  • 135. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:22 pm

    This thread is about Palin. Your point?

    EVERY thread is about Palin with you. THAT’S the point.

    Such a focus on someone who wasn’t elected.

  • 136. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:23 pm

    “Do me a favor … someone actually answer what I wrote with an alternative.”

    We have done so many times over the last 3 days.

    We told you to stop politicizing this. That is the only alternative worth mentioning.

  • 137. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:27 pm

    you would also be analyzing where does she go from here?

    It doesn’t matter where she goes from here, JaredRutherford…you’ll be following right after her…tweeting about her, writing post after post about her, dropping facetious and snarky comments into every thread about her, and ignoring or making excuses about every bit of vitriol and hate expended on her by people, who like you, cannot stop rolling around and relishing in the hate that the policially correct find it politically correct to engage in.

  • 138. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:32 pm

    Would you take even 3 seconds way from your PDS to reflect on those things the way you expect her to do?

    Ignoring for the moment that Sarah has a waaaaay louder bullhorn than I do — yes, if I saw violence inflicted against conservatives, I might give a second thought to things I’ve said in the heat of the moment. I don’t think any of your examples equate to a metaphorical kill list, but fine, you’ve pointed out “violent” rhetoric on my part. Certainly if something bad happened to someone I tastelessly dissed in writing and i was called on it, I would most certainly say that my words were poorly chosen.

    It’s funny (not in a haha sort of way) … my uncle was at a large dinner gathering once with lots of tables. His table mate said “I really hate that guy over there”. My uncle, purely jesting, said “why don’t you go over there and punch him in the nose?” To his utter mortification, his table mate did just that. An unintended consequence but my uncle felt horrible about it.

    We are responsible for what we say. Maybe it’s a symptom of the blogosphere that we forget that.

  • 139. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:34 pm

    You know, we are not making the right connections here….

    Obama labeled those against the liberal immigration agenda as “enemies.”

    This happened in the same state where a controversial measure against illegal immigration was shot down by Obama.

    So this is really just a guy…an enemy, as defined by Obama…acting like an enemy. Right?

    Maybe he was even acting in a sort of pre-emptive self defense. After all…he is seen as the enemy. Remember?

    Barack Obama isn’t responsible for the shooting in Arizona. But regardless, he should be suffering from ulcerative colitis today because of his past violent rhetoric that has obviously been taken to heart by a madman.

  • 140. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:36 pm

    In light of this unfair attack on her, what should be her next move?

    WHY should she have to do anything? The very question presumes gulit/culpability in her. More fodder for the passive agressive bullshit your trying to play here.

    Play Palin advisor for two seconds and let’s see if you can do better than her gang does

    Beef up security at home and at the kids’ schools, continue to pray for the victims in private, because it’s about genuine faith, not election year Democratic Piety, if you must give an interview, give it to FOX, because they are to only ones who will not preface every question with a presumption of undeserved and unproven guilt, and go to the range for a few hours of plinking, if only to remind people that there are real rights at stake, and to remind those like R who have an unhealthy obsession about her that she can hit where she aims.

  • 141. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:36 pm

    Huck, regarding #40, it is arguable whether we are seeing a lens “focused” on the candidate in keeping with the narrative and on screen verbiage or whether it was meant to be a gunsight. If I were Mitchell’s campaign advisor (provided I saw crosshairs and not a focused lens) I would have advised him that the ad was subject to misinterpretation and should be changed.

  • 142. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:39 pm

    Yes, I read the article — obviously. You think you’ve got Palin by the tail. And we say grow the fuck up. This is about politiciang a tragedy.

    “You guys care as little for Palin as I do because if you actually liked her, you would also be analyzing where does she go from here?”

    I already told you that. I don’t care where Palin goes from here. I don’t know anyone here that does. From what I can tell, most everyone here would hope she’d go away. What part of that don’t you understand? You’re the one obsessed with her.

    I care about you politcizing a tragedy in the most disturbing way. Why don’t you answer that, and the actual questions being posed to you, Rutherford?

  • 143. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    If I were Mitchell’s campaign advisor (provided I saw crosshairs and not a focused lens)

    More knowledge from the man who wets himself at the sight of a firearm?

    I know. I get it. We aren’t supposed to believe our lying eyes, we’re supposed to believe it was something different altogether.

  • 144. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:46 pm

    I’m done.

  • 145. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 2:48 pm

    Rutherford, you went after your uncle, right? Not the guy that threw the punch I would hope. That’s the right thing to do. Oh, and at the dinner table too, right?

  • 146. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    You know, we are not making the right connections here….

    I have said in the past Obama’s enemy talk is unPresidential. I have even gone so far as to say Presidents need to govern and not campaign, even for other politicians.

    So here’s what you’re looking for ,,,, everybody needs to take a step back. …

    Starting with Palin :-)

  • 147. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 3:56 pm

    and go to the range for a few hours of plinking, if only to remind people that there are real rights at stake

    Yeah kinda like she brought the cookies to a school to remind the kids that Michelle Obama shouldn’t tell them how to eat. :evil:

  • 148. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:02 pm

    Yeah kinda like she brought the cookies to a school to remind the kids that Michelle Obama shouldn’t tell them how to eat.

    I forgot. It is TOTALLY Michelle’s prerogative to tell everyone else’s kids how to eat. Because she has that moral and legal authority, and all.

    http://jezebel.com/5704551/michelle-obama-americas-first-cookie-monster

    Wut? I can’t hear you over the sound of her crunching away on a cookie.

  • 149. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:03 pm

    Last post concerning this – unless new news becomes available. But I think this letter from an author whom I used to like much better, pretty much summarizes for me how I think and believe. I have found this entire thing revolting, as I lay in bed last night wondering what it must be like to be on a ventilator with shot through my head, unable to speak and follow simple commands.

    Six people are dead, including a little girl. Thirteen more are seriously wounded. It is a tragedy – and we all should leave it at that and no more.

    Now we have explainers. They came into vogue with the murder of President Kennedy. They explained why the “real” culprit was not a self-described Marxist who had moved to Moscow, then returned to support Castro. No, the culprit was a “climate of hate” in conservative Dallas, the “paranoid style” of American (conservative) politics, or some other national sickness resulting from insufficient liberalism.

    Last year, New York Times columnist Charles Blow explained that “the optics must be irritating” to conservatives: Barack Obama is black, Nancy Pelosi is female, Rep. Barney Frank is gay, Rep. Anthony Weiner (an unimportant Democrat, listed to serve Blow’s purposes) is Jewish. “It’s enough,” Blow said, “to make a good old boy go crazy.” The Times, which after the Tucson shooting said that “many on the right” are guilty of “demonizing” people and of exploiting “arguments of division,” apparently was comfortable with Blow’s insinuation that conservatives are misogynistic, homophobic, racist anti-Semites.

    On Sunday, the Times explained Tucson: “It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But . . .” The “directly” is priceless. . . .

    This McCarthyism of the left – devoid of intellectual content, unsupported by data – is a mental tic, not an idea but a tactic for avoiding engagement with ideas. It expresses limitless contempt for the American people, who have reciprocated by reducing liberalism to its current characteristics of electoral weakness and bad sociology. ~ George Will

    Amen…

  • 150. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:06 pm

    Tigre I didn’t need to go after my uncle. He expressed remorse.

    How about this statement from Palin that would have deflated all of her opponents.

    Our condolences go out to all the victims. In light of this tragedy, now is a time to reflect on the heated rhetoric in our political discourse. I have been guilty of it myself and I hope all, regardless of ideology, will join me in ratcheting down the noise a little bit.

    BAM, done, every Palin whiner like myself completely left speechless. If I were her advisor, that’s the statement I’d tell her to issue.

    BiW would just tell her to go shoot a few rounds. I’d earn my salary as her advisor and he would not.

  • 151. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:13 pm

    That Jezebel link was kind of amusing …. especially some of the comments on the page.

  • 152. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:18 pm

    So Palin is at fault or not? Which is it?

  • 153. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    Apologies were asked of here too. Where’s yours?

  • 154. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    Apologies were asked of you here too. Where’s yours?

  • 155. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:25 pm

    “Our condolences go out to all the victims. In light of this tragedy, now is a time to reflect on the heated rhetoric in our political discourse. I have been guilty of it myself and I hope all, regardless of ideology, will join me in ratcheting down the noise a little bit. ”

    Rutherford, where is your statement saying those things?

    You have yet to offer your own personal condolences to the families. And you have yet to admit that you are guilty of heated rhetoric in your own political discourse, opting, instead, to discount your own words simply because they have not referenced someone who has since seen violence.

    You claim that you would instruct Palin to do what you have not even bothered to do, yourself. We have a term for that. You’ll find it hidden in my pen name.

  • 156. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    This place needs a joke…

    An old prospector shuffled into the town of El Indio, Texas leading an old tired mule. The old man headed straight for the only saloon in town, to clear his parched throat. He walked up to the saloon and tied his old mule to the hitch rail.

    As he stood there, brushing some of the dust from his face and clothes, a young gunslinger stepped out of the saloon with a gun in one hand and a bottle of whiskey in the other.

    The young gunslinger looked at the old man and laughed, saying, “Hey old man, have you ever danced?”

    The old man looked up at the gunslinger and said, “No, I never did dance … never really wanted to.”

    A crowd had gathered as the gunslinger grinned and said, “Well, you old fool, you’re gonna dance now,” and started shooting at the old man’s feet.

    The old prospector, not wanting to get a toe blown off, started hopping around like a flea on a hot skillet.

    Everybody was laughing, fit to be tied. When his last bullet had been fired, the young gunslinger, still laughing, holstered his gun and turned around to go back into the saloon.

    The old man turned to his pack mule, pulled out a double-barreled shotgun, and cocked both hammers. The loud clicks carried clearly through the desert air.

    The crowd stopped laughing immediately. The young gunslinger heard the sounds too, and he turned around very slowly.

    The silence was almost deafening.

    The crowd watched as the young gunman stared at the old timer and the large gaping holes of those twin 10 gauge barrels. The barrels of the shotgun never wavered in the old man’s hands, as he quietly said, “Son, have you ever kissed a mule’s ass?”

    The gunslinger swallowed hard and said, “No sir … but… I’ve always wanted to.”

    There are a few lessons here for Liberals:

    Never be arrogant.
    Don’t waste ammunition.
    Drugs, alcohol and bold talk make you think you’re smarter than you are.
    Always, always make sure you know who has the power.
    :wink:

  • 157. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 6:04 pm

    BAM, done, every Palin whiner like myself completely left speechless.

    Never, ever happen. We’re talking about the object of your obsession here. It wouldn’t be sincere enough, public enough, the color of the outfit would be wrong, you wouldn’t care for the tone of voice.

    Afterall, you’re twisted up over her statement on FB. Nevermind the fact that it was restrained, and did not take the focus away from where it should have been…on the victims…not that she need have worried…the media, the left (but I repeat myself) and Sherriff Doofus did that anyway.

    It wasn’t about her, nor should it have ever been about her. A presser with 100 snapping cameras and a bevy of microphones would have made it so. And then been fodder for all the discussion about her “crosshairs” and her “apparent guilt” anyway.

    I won’t bother trying to put into words how disgusted I am with your ridiculous take on this, R.

  • 158. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 10, 2011 at 6:11 pm

    Oh, and the word you’re looking for for your idiotic tweets is “reckless”, not “wreckless”. The controversy you’re helping to gin up has nothing to do with a lack of wrecks.

  • 159. Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste « The 800lb Gorilla  |  January 10, 2011 at 6:39 pm

    [...] No one but Laughner deserves to be held accountable
    and punished for this.   But those who are using this crisis
    for political expediency, deserve nothing but shame and
    condemnation for their [...]

  • 160. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 6:39 pm

    I still want to know why an apology from Palin is owed. Rutherford said there’s no discernable connection. I asked. Which is it with Palin, an admittedly different story than R’s uncle?

    I think R’s rhetoric is to blame fpr the tragedy too. All he has to do is apologize for lending to the atmosphere of hate in this country. This is the time to do it. Look at what he’s said about Palin.

    I want an apology too for the exploitation R has engaged in when real people died. Nor remorse offered from him. Just an opportunity for validation of a stupid point. No ratcheting down from R — ratchet it up! Ata Boy!

  • 161. an800lbgorilla  |  January 10, 2011 at 6:53 pm

    http://an800lbgorilla.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/never-let-a-crisis-go-to-waste/

  • 162. an800lbgorilla  |  January 10, 2011 at 7:28 pm

    R, here’s a comparison for you.

    Let’s think about the Ft. Hood shooting and how everyone on the left cried for patience and caution until we had the facts. And even after we knew he cried allah akbar and after we knew he had ties to Anwar Aulaqi, the left cried for calm.

    The bodies in Tucson weren’t even cold and you on the left were shouting RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST from the roof tops. No calls for patience or calm, just anti-Palin rhetoric.

    The fact that this guy turns out to be some left-wing loon is poetic. He’s one of yours and you have shit all over you for your actions.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/journalists-urged-caution-after-ft-hood-now-race-blame-palin-afte

  • 163. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 9:19 pm

    Actually G the guy has no proven ideology. He’s a mishmash of gobbledeegook and from what I heard, he talks about hidden messages encoded in grammar similar to some right wing nut job whose name I don’t recall. He also holds leftish “positions”.

    The guy cannot yet be pinned down. An expert on the tube today said his pathology trumps any ideology.

  • 164. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 9:22 pm

    BTW I never screamed right wing extremist. We didn’t and still don’t know his “motivation”.

  • 165. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 9:25 pm

    I’ve been accused of politicizing a tragedy. When there is an attempted assassination of a POLITICIAN is not the tragedy ipso facto politicized?

  • 166. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2011 at 9:27 pm

    Every time I wrote “wreckless” it didn’t look right to me. I should have trusted my gut. My spellcheck didn’t catch it.

  • 167. poolman  |  January 10, 2011 at 10:03 pm

    Palin sure brings up the emotions. I thought we were going for facts. Words and actions always have consequences…

    The death threats increased threefold after the targets were displayed: Fact
    Giffords had made a public statement about violence and Palin’s target map: Fact
    This crazy person should have never been able to buy a gun: Fact
    The crosshair map was removed right after this tragedy: Fact
    There are good people dead and wounded: Fact
    This IS terrorism, and it isn’t Islamic: Fact
    So much for Homeland Security. Fire their asses.

    Everything else is speculation or opinion at this point.

  • 168. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 10:13 pm

    “When there is an attempted assassination of a POLITICIAN is not the tragedy ipso facto politicized?”

    Still can’t link it up to Palin, can you?

  • 169. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 10:15 pm

    “This IS terrorism, and it isn’t Islamic: Fact”

    No it’s not. Although I haven’t examined the latest Simpsons episodes, all of the evidence is to the contrary.

  • 170. Tex Taylor  |  January 10, 2011 at 10:28 pm

    Rutherford, this is pretty damning material. It’s detailed, long, indisputable and telling.

    There are many hatemongers in this country. Most in the media are from the Left and I believe this more than proves it.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

  • 171. fakename2  |  January 10, 2011 at 10:48 pm

    So…I thought I would refresh myself on the gun laws in Florida, since that’s where I live, and compare them to those in Arizona, because unless you’re living in a cave, there’s been a lot of talk about that in the last few days. While I was at it, I decided to see if the NRA had anything to say about the shooting and they did. Here it is, from Wayne LaPierre: “Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this senseless tragedy, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and their families during this difficult time. We join the rest of the country in praying for the quick recovery for those injured.” And that is it. Here’s the link to NRA.org if you don’t want to take my word for it: http://home.nra.org/classic.aspx
    The discussion has amazed me…it’s like it’s become worse, which I didn’t think possible. You conservatives seem to be hunkering down, closing ranks.
    R does not owe you an apology nor does he owe an apology to Palin. Nor does he owe you an answer to your constant questions. Answer this. Answer that. I asked you a question back at comment # XYZ and you still haven’t responded. Perhaps he recognizes, as I do, that it isn’t up to you to frame the debate.

  • 172. poolman  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:24 pm

    Oh Tigger…

    Terrorism U.S. Law definition:
    Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.

    Sounds pretty close to me. Which hairs are you splitting?

  • 173. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:36 pm

    “the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.”

    Huh? How does this fit? Other than premediatated and noncombatant targets, it misses entirely.

    Here’s another:

    ter·ror·ism   /ˈtɛrəˌrɪzəm/ Show Spelled
    [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA

    –noun
    1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
    2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
    3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism

    Missed again.

    The problem is a psycho did this. There’s no evidence it was politically motivated or intended to coerce, despite what Rutherford is trying to convince you. In fact, this guy seems totally disassociated from society, counterculture, politics (and reality) altogether.

    If that changes, let me know.

  • 174. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:39 pm

    “R does not owe you an apology nor does he owe an apology to Palin. Nor does he owe you an answer to your constant questions.”

    Hmmmmm.. .Yet he demands them of her. Did you get the point?

    “Perhaps he recognizes, as I do, that it isn’t up to you to frame the debate.”

    What the hell does that mean?

  • 175. El Tigre  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:41 pm

    “Here it is, from Wayne LaPierre: “Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this senseless tragedy, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and their families during this difficult time. We join the rest of the country in praying for the quick recovery for those injured.” And that is it.”

    Was there supposed to be something more? If so, what? I don’t get your point.

  • 176. poolman  |  January 10, 2011 at 11:47 pm

    Why was the underwear bomber called a terrorist?
    Or the Fort Hood dude?
    Or the shoe bomber?

    One person’s psycho is another person’s terrorist.

  • 177. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:00 am

    I thought their agendas were Islamic retribution.

  • 178. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:02 am

    Where does Homeland Security fit into this?

  • 179. poolman  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:11 am

    Where does Homeland Security fit into this?

    Exactly.

  • 180. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:11 am

    Fakename, I am perplexed by your comment.

    Isn’t Giffords an NRA member. What’s theproblem with its statement?

    Read my #39.

    Do you have a point?

  • 181. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:14 am

    Poolman, “exactly” what?

    The DHS is responsible for securing America’s borders, protecting America from terrorism, executing immigration policy and organizing disaster preparedness and recovery.

    Read more: What Is Homeland Security Responsible for? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_6455829_homeland-security-responsible-for_.html#ixzz1AhGVe6AO

  • 182. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:18 am

    I’ve been trying to come up with one single incident of violence directly tied to the supposed rise in right-wing rhetoric referred to by Rutherford. Is there one?

  • 183. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:21 am

    Rutherford, have you seen this gem?

    http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DLC-Targeting-map.gif

    Was it a threat that required retraction for some reason like you insist of Palin?

  • 184. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:53 am

    Fake,

    Unlike you, until this post I had never witnessed Rutherford attempt to practice McCarthyism, and these ridiculous and despicable accusations are the height of hypocrisy and the most egregious tactic of politic. To try and capitalize on death. Everyone of you ought to be ashamed to be affiliated in any fashion of these accusations.

    Rutherford deserves to be called out and one day, he will recognize that fact.

    We “wingers” aren’t hunkering down about anything, because there is absolutely nothing to hunker down about. We have every right to point out the ludicrous and incredulous nature of the Left’s accusations, and we are not going to allow worms like you to get away with bald faced lies and rank propaganda anymore.

    Rutherford owes no one here an apology. He does owe Sarah Palin, her administrative staff, and the families that have suffered in this tragic event an apology. Sarah Palin is in no way related to this event, and the insinuation that she has, is Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church personified. I am aghast my friend Rutherford even entered into this. He knows better and he is better. It’s an embarrassment in judgment to an otherwise generally nice guy and good sport.

    Rutherford is lashing out because of the failure of liberalism the last two years and the fact he has so much of himself invested in politics. It hurts to be proven wrong and Rutherford has reacted poorly recently to the barrage of criticisms.

    The Left’s tank is empty and your persuasion has been judged a failure by America. Just like the Dimocratic party did at the Paul Wellstone funeral turned orgy, this one has blown up in your face when you made a show.

    And I don’t give a damn what you think you are, how smart you may believe you are, or what you’ve deemed necessary and allowable to be posted.

  • 185. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:05 am

    This is rich. The most hate filled, divisive, lying, propagandizing sacks of shit in American now are petitioning for “appealing to no more violent rhetoric.”

    These assholes are the master of vitriolic rhetoric. Another attempt at McCarthyism. A new version of the fairness doctrine.

    http://pol.moveon.org/debatenothate/

    Do these turds really think citizens are this stupid that we don’t recognize exactly what they are attempting?

  • 186. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:29 am

    Rutherford and St. Andi of the Power Glutes have something in common:

    http://doubleplusundead.com/2011/01/11/andrew-sullivan-is-nothing-if-not-predictable/

  • 187. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:31 am

    “Answer this. Answer that. I asked you a question back at comment # XYZ and you still haven’t responded. Perhaps he recognizes, as I do, that it isn’t up to you to frame the debate.”

    Are you aware that Rutherford has banned someone from here because they ignored his questions?

  • 188. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:37 am

    A little bit more of the stuff Rutherford expects Palin to apologize for from people he’ll ignore it from:

    http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/01/the-face-of-hate.html

  • 189. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:54 am

    Mediaite

    “Penn noted that it took the Oklahoma City tragedy in order for President Clinton to “reconnect” with the American people.

    He then stepped off the cliff by saying that President Obama needed a “similar event” to achieve that reconnection following his party’s midterm losses.”

    NYT

    “The subtext for the political discussion was the new balance of power in Washington, and how the shootings might play into Democratic efforts to regain initiative — and Republican efforts to keep it — after their losses in November.”

    Politico

    They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”

    Newsweek

    “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” Rahm Emanuel famously said in 2008. The same goes for a shooting spree that gravely wounds a beloved congresswoman.

    Politico

    “Veteran Democratic consultant Dan Gerstein said the crisis “really plays to Obama’s strengths as consensus-builder” and gives him the opportunity to build a deeper emotional connection with the people he governs.”

    They telegraphed their move before they even made it. Looked for the first opportunity to make it happen, and are now jumping on it. That it is so obvious isn’t near as sickening as the fact that people like Rutherford are believing they have some kind of moral high ground as they eat every bite of this blatant bullshit.

  • 190. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 3:01 am

    And if Poolman had any sense of consistency he’d be accusing Obama of giving this guy the gun.

    After all, if we have a president who will kill 3000 Americans to get his way, what is 6?

  • 191. poolman  |  January 11, 2011 at 3:30 am

    Offered without comment…

  • 192. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 9:41 am

    Poolman, the Simpsons parody needs comment.

  • 193. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 9:46 am

    Rutherford, staying quiet? Still secretly wishing it was a right-winger or Tea Partier that did the shooitng? Waiting for MSNBC to tell you how to deal with your stupidity?

  • 194. an800lbgorilla  |  January 11, 2011 at 9:49 am

    In a word, YES.

  • 195. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 10:29 am

    Just read George Will. He nailed it. The McCarthyism of the left.

    http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will011111.php3

    David Brooks got this one too, even thought NY Times was one of the initial instigators after their first line: the gullible Rutherfords of the world with a twitter account and unquestioning allegiance to the vile-spewing Olbermann.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/opinion/11brooks.html?ref=davidbrooks

  • 196. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:24 pm

    “On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod’s law dictates he’ll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr – where are you now that we need you?”

    Sourced: The Guardian, 23 October 2004

    Leftists are lovely people everywhere. And how quickly and conveniently they’ve forgotten their own grievous sins.

  • 197. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:29 pm

    Rutherford, no matter how long you keep this sorry POS post up and sulk, she isn’t going to “apologize”. Not now. Not ever.

  • 198. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:41 pm

    Here’s one for the do gooder and fascist Flake – our resident speech police. She rails on and on about Rick Scott on her own blog and how sick he is. Could be understood as violent and hate speech: :wink:

    From Democratic Representative Paul Kanjorski (D, PA) defeated this fall – a longstanding member of Congress, mind you–on the Governor of Florida, Rick Scott:

    “That Scott down there that’s running for governor of Florida,” Mr. Kanjorski said. “Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him [sic] and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he’s running for governor of Florida. He’s a millionaire and a billionaire. He’s no hero. He’s a damn crook. It’s just we don’t prosecute big crooks.”

    My, my…what violent talk.

  • 199. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 12:42 pm

    Nor should she.

    She recognizes, as do the rest of us, that it is not up to the Rutherford’s of the world to frame the debate. Which is exactly what they are attempting to do.

    Too bad FN2 doesn’t read her own words back to herself, or she might recognize that, too.

    The facts are undeniable. A month ago Dem. strategists commented that Obama needed an OKC moment in order to rebound. And now they have found one, and are running full speed ahead with it. They aren’t even making an attempt to hide it.

    THAT is the politicizing that is going on, Rutherford. And you know it. So quit acting like a fucking dumbass with this “doesn’t a political assassination politicize the issue?” bullshit.

  • 200. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    The facts are undeniable. A month ago Dem. strategists commented that Obama needed an OKC moment in order to rebound. And now they have found one, and are running full speed ahead with it. They aren’t even making an attempt to hide it.

    THAT is the politicizing that is going on, Rutherford. And you know it. So quit acting like a fucking dumbass with this “doesn’t a political assassination politicize the issue?” bullshit.

    Excellent Huck – and exactly right. Politicizing death for gain – depraved and wicked.

    Ironically, what people forget was it was not Clinton that handled the situation in Oklahoma City so gracefully. The real shining light of saying the right things at the right time, showing leadership and bravery during the tragedy, coordinating the rescue effort and bringing McVeigh to justice was Governor Frank Keating (R-OK), with most everything handled locally.

    Clinton got credit for many things that were not deserving. What I remember of Clinton was not his grace during OKC, but his negligence during Waco – however, I don’t remember ever blaming Clinton for the bombing, and in fact was very supportive. I blamed a madman named McVeigh.

    And now the Left can’t say the same.

  • 201. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    I wonder why the dog isn’t over here calling Rutherford an echo chamber……

  • 202. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    Meanwhile, while we are focused on a shooting that is obviously a shattering tragedy for the victims but has no particularly deep political meaning, this assassination and its aftermath is pregnant with minatory significance and should be scaring agitated, hand-wringing American columnists to death, or at least into pro forma agitated hand-wringing if they can’t muster a bit of authentic sentiment:

    ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Cheering crowds have gathered in recent days to support the assassin who riddled the governor of Punjab with 26 bullets and to praise his attack — carried out in the name of the Prophet Muhammad — as an act of heroism. To the surprise of many, chief among them have been Pakistan’s young lawyers, once seen as a force for democracy.

    Their energetic campaign on behalf of the killer has caught the government flat-footed and dismayed friends and supporters of the slain politician, Salman Taseer, an outspoken proponent of liberalism who had challenged the nation’s strict blasphemy laws. It has also confused many in the broader public and observers abroad, who expected to see a firm state prosecution of the assassin.

    Instead, before his court appearances, the lawyers showered rose petals over the confessed killer, Malik Mumtaz Hussain Qadri, a member of an elite police group who had been assigned to guard the governor, but who instead turned his gun on him. They have now enthusiastically taken up his defense.

    That’s a nuclear power. Which one of these events is really worth talking about this much? ~Claire Berlinski, “The self-indulgence of Tucson”

  • 203. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:16 pm

    Guys, part of the problem is that we use the same words, but don’t speak the same language as Rutherford anymore.

    http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/talking-with-the-left-a-basic-lesson/

  • 204. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:24 pm

    More violent imagery from the right.

    “Halperin: “And, I already made that criticism, as well. they’re right, but rather than seizing on it and turning the other cheek, they’re back at their war stations. that’s not going to help us.”

    Oh wait, that’s not from the right, is it?

    My bad….

  • 205. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    On Sunday, the New York Times published a front-page story, “Bloodshed Puts New Focus on Vitriol in Politics.” Nowhere did it mention the vitriol hurled at Tea Party activists, who are routinely derided to as “tea baggers” and racists, and now stand accused of incitement to murder. If you want an example of the lack of civility plaguing our political discourse, look no further than this weekend’s shameful efforts to use this tragedy to demonize the Tea Party.

    Well said…and I have read a blog affiliated with a sometimes frequent commenter here and blog owner that is both fond of the use of “tea baggers” and “racists.” Will the accessory to murder charges follow suit? Stay tuned…because it is coming.

  • 206. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    Tex, Rutherford won’t want to talk about Pakistan.

    Recall it was just a couple weeks ago he was calling for us to draft women and invade that country, along with several others.

    But now this week he is afraid a Pres. Palin will do the same thing.

  • 207. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:37 pm

    “I wonder why the dog isn’t over here calling Rutherford an echo chamber.”

    I wonder why Rutherford isn’t commenting on his own blog.

    Not really. He’ll consider it some kind of experiment rather than defend his indefensible positions. Tweet seemes to be tweeting for him though — filled with all of those hopes and dreams and rhetoric of reconciliation.

  • 208. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:46 pm

    Too late…the Teabagger Blog has already written that Sarah Palin and the 2nd Amendment guilty by association, replete with quotes from Paul Krugman. I soiled myself by taking a look.

    I should have known, as it predictable as the sun rising.

    As a bonus while there, I learned that Nancy Pelosi stated for the record Obama has created more jobs than Bush did – “proof” is provided. I guess they missed that “myth” has already been laid to waste three months ago, and I wondered how they rationalized the burgeoning unemployment numbers? The disconnect and fantasy these people live under is mind numbing. :twisted:

    http://larrymwalkerjr.blogspot.com/2010/10/mythbuster-has-obama-created-more-jobs.html

    Unless Obama created 3,000,000 new jobs the last three months, I think we can label that “myth” as busted.

  • 209. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:48 pm

    You went to look at Madusa?

  • 210. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:49 pm

    yikes “Medusa”

  • 211. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:51 pm

    Interesting how badly thy “want” that to be the case isn’t it? So bad, they’re going to make the connection even when it doesn’t exist, like Rutherford.

  • 212. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:56 pm

    As a parent, I find this tragic like I do the deaths of the individuals…

    Jared Loughner’s mother has been in bed, crying nonstop since Saturday, neighbor Wayne Smith, 70, told KPHO-TV. Amy and Randy Loughner want to know where they went wrong with their 22-year-old son, who is charged with trying to kill U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killing a federal judge.

    “I told them they didn’t fail. They taught him everything about right and wrong,” Smith said. “We all know you can teach someone everything and have no control how it works out.”

    Roxanne Osler, of Tucson, whose son was a friend of Jared Loughner’s, said he had a bad relationship with his parents and had distanced himself from family.

    “What Jared did was wrong. But people need to know about him,” she told The Washington Post. “I wish people would have taken a better notice of him and gotten him help. … He had nobody, and that’s not a nice place to be.”

    This is the question that we should be asking ourselves, instead of casting blame. How do these sick people continue to fall through the cracks? It should have never come to this, and this might have been stopped had we had the proper care and vigilance in place.

  • 213. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 1:59 pm

    You went to look at Medusa?

    Political porn – I always feel like I’ve sinned after visiting that place, as it an orgy of lies, deceitful propaganda and depravity. As wrong as Rutherford has been in this affair, and that is where he has run seeking comfort I noticed instead of answering the questions here, I still do not put him in the category of contemptible.

    I do those two.

  • 214. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:08 pm

    Wish I could say I’m surprised. I’m sure the hugs are warm.

    On this one Rutherford is contemptible.

  • 215. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:13 pm

    “I wish people would have taken a better notice of him and gotten him help. … He had nobody, and that’s not a nice place to be.”

    Including the shit-talking sheriff who now wants to pass blame he deserves onto others.

  • 216. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:23 pm

    WSJ

    “A safe at Mr. Loughner’s home contained a form letter from Ms. Giffords’ office thanking him for attending a 2007 “Congress on your Corner” event in Tucson. The safe also held an envelope with handwritten notes, including the name of Ms. Giffords, as well as “I planned ahead,” “My assassination,” and what appeared to be Mr. Loughner’s signature, according to an FBI affidavit. ”

    “That interest might have triggered Mr. Loughner’s first meeting with Ms. Giffords in 2007. Mr. Loughner said he asked the lawmaker, “How do you know words mean anything?” recalled Mr. Montanaro. He said Mr. Loughner was “aggravated” when Ms. Giffords, after pausing for a couple of seconds, “responded to him in Spanish and moved on with the meeting.”

    Anyone need any reminder of which side was screaming about taking back our country in 2007?

  • 217. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    Will Rutherford share in the blame when this happens?

  • 218. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:36 pm

    Sheriff Clarence Dupnik should be terminated immediately for gross incompetence. Even the Arizona Republic which I linked above is telling him to knock it off and shut up.

    Speaking of not nice place to be, I knew this guy once in high school that sounded like Loughner. Most people were terrified of him because he had this insanity about him, and was big and bad enough to do considerable damage. There are only a few that have scared me, but this guy was one. To the best of my knowledge, the guy had absolutely no friends besides this poor, homely girlfriend. who herself had obviously been abused.

    I knew it was going to end up bad for her and it did. The bastard beat the hell out of her too before he was eighteen years of age. Damn near choked her to death, crushed her larynx. When he was arrested, I remember the paper saying while he was resisting, he was throwing cops off like flies.

    His parents were missionaries of consider age and adopted him early on. I didn’t know the whole story but they did the best they could. This guy was damaged goods from the start.

    I looked him up and sure enough he ended up in the Oklahoma Dept. of Corrections for meth distribution, stolen property, domestic abuse, and the like. Lifetime of adult crime and I’m amazed murder wasn’t in the list. He had over 20 mug shots.

    So I know damn well it’s not always bad parents that produce bad kids. I feel for Loughner’s parents in this matter too.

  • 219. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 2:46 pm

    That was lovely Huck. :evil:

    Reading that, it’s pretty obvious that violence against Palin someplace, somewhere will take place.

    These thugs from the Left may find out Palin is more than a pretty face if they go looking for trouble. And I’ve found this spousal Todd an interesting character. He’s pretty low key, but I get the impression you wouldn’t want to mess with him or his family.

    I don’t think they scare easily.

  • 220. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 11, 2011 at 3:00 pm

    Huck, that will be different.

    1.) Because she will deserve it for not rending her clothes and donning sack cloth and ashes because a nutbar went off on the object of his obsession; and

    2.) because the left will say so, so shut up, fascist!

  • 221. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2011 at 4:14 pm

    Rutherford, staying quiet?

    Well let’s see. I had a choice last night. Stay up until 1 in the morning reading charges and posting counter-charges, or get a full night’s sleep for the first time in three or four days.

    I chose the latter. :-)

  • 222. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 5:46 pm

    Don’t worry. Fakename had you covered.

    TiVo had you covered on the MSNBC front (that’s even backing away from it).

    Stupid is as stupid does.

  • 223. Bluebird50  |  January 11, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    I think someone missed the point on Keith’s commentary. Feeding into the frenzy isn’t going to bring back the dead. Sara Palin, Obama, the left, the right, the NRA, the NAACP, Gay Alliance or Brett Farve didn’t pull that trigger. A crazy lunatic did. A lunatic who read blogs or listens to hate shit. Maybe his mother was on meth or his father beat the crap out of him. I don’t know either way He should get the death penalty. His parents too.

    We are all to blame for spewing hate. I am sick of this crap. The division of this country is deplorable.
    This is only the beginning of the nightmare. On Friday 3 envelopes exploded at the pentagon. What should be asked is why wasn’t the FBI or Secret Service there.. A congressman and Federal Judge were at a public event. Where was Homeland Security? If anyone is to blame.. it is Janet N. She should be Fired. And here DC is suppose to be the most literate City! They don’t even read bills there.

  • 224. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 10:38 pm

    One of the best political journalists going but doesn’t get much mention in the mainstream media…WSJ – James Taranto.

    To describe the Tucson massacre as an act of “political violence” is, quite simply, a lie. It is as if, two days after the Columbine massacre, a conservative newspaper of the Times’s stature had described that atrocious crime as an act of “educational violence” and used it as an occasion to denounce teachers unions. Such an editorial would be shameful and indecent even if the arguments it made were meritorious.

    Damn straight….

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576075660624213434.html?mod=wsj_share_facebook

  • 225. El Tigre  |  January 11, 2011 at 11:01 pm

    Comment read:

    “Omar Thornton a black man killed eight whites in Manchester, CT during Aug 2010. He claimed he did this because of the deep racism in the USA.

    Was Thornton’s rampage condoned and in fact made possible by people like Rev Jeremiah “God D… the US of KKK” Wright? The Obamas spent over twenty years in a church that spouts deep hatred for white America claiming that blacks are “captives” in this country today.

    Why not tie the acts of Omar Thornton directly to Obama? Maybe individual accountability is only something that is applicable to those on the right!”

    Bueller. . . Bueller. . .

  • 226. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 11:12 pm

    I need to leave this here, because I made the mistake of going to look for Rutherford earlier today and took the time to refute Graychin’s propaganda at the Two Useful Idiot’s blog.

    It will be shit canned due to “technical glitches” (cough cough), so I need to leave the comment somewhere. Here is as good as any. :lol:

    =============

    I came looking for the ‘craven’ Rutherford as he has chickened out on his own blog, and that is the only reason I happened along the blog of recorded propaganda. Though I doubt you’ve got the cojones to leave this post, I’ll refute it. You put your trust in the wrong people Mr. Graychin, seeking results to mask the failures.

    Mathematical tricks, a couple of Nancy Pelosi whoppers, with a Graychin masquerade thrown in for intent.

    ———-

    Before anyone accuses me of engaging in tiresome Bush-bashing, please understand that it is not my purpose at all.

    Sure it is. Your ‘progressive’ politics of socialism light has been an epic failure and you’re grasping for straws trying to defend the failure – that is your exact intent. Don’t let a crisis go to waste is the liberal theme.

    ——–

    The Lie.

    This “myth” of Obama job growth was busted more than three months ago and though I can’t find the actual page of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because of laziness, I did find a website with copy of it. If need be to prove you wrong, I’ll be happy to find the page.

    http://larrymwalkerjr.blogspot.com/2010/10/mythbuster-has-obama-created-more-jobs.html

    Unless the Obama economy has added 4,000,000 new jobs in the last three months, you’ve been had, because you need to start at the beginning. We’ve actually lost well over 2.5MM jobs while Obama has held office.

    ————

    Now the mathematical trick. The 40s was the largest degree of increased GDP. Of course it was, as we were coming out of a Depression – there was no where to go but up with unemployment sitting at 14.7% in late ’39.

    When Bush inherited the tech bubble in Spring 2001, there was almost full employment and no where to go but down. The fact that Bush able to sustain it for 52 months a short time after 9/11 and the tech bubble, is not a testament to a Bush failure, but a success. America was never richer than in Oct. 2007, and at the economic definition of full employment (4.4% unemployment).

    Anybody can pick a moment in time, cherry pick the results and the time frame, and put a positive spin of the success or failure.

    The only fair way to do this is to take the first two years of the Bush years and then make comparison.

    I’m not sure you capable of shame, but you ought to be.

  • 227. fakename2  |  January 11, 2011 at 11:49 pm

    Still laughing at the idea that the WSJ is NOT considered “mainstream media”. Hello :)

  • 228. Tex Taylor  |  January 11, 2011 at 11:58 pm

    Flake,

    Was that directed at me? Surely not. You’re so cravenly, I never know who exactly who you are directing your snark at, because undoubtedly first party is another in an endless of neuroses that you behold.

    If so, I did not say the WSJ not mainstream media. I said one whose name doesn’t get much mention in the mainstream media, as in not well known.

    Hello? :twisted:

  • 229. Tex Taylor  |  January 12, 2011 at 1:42 am

    Can you stomach this awful shit? This is so awful, I couldn’t help but laugh.

    http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/01/11/obama-to-hold-memorial-rally/

    Mix memorials and something pseudo-religious amongst a bunch of progressves, and you’re liable to end up with a naked orgy singing Kumbaya to to the Flaming Gonzo Tower.

    Give me another toke – they ought to institutionalize the dipshit that dreamed this slogan up for depravity.

  • 230. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2011 at 2:11 am

    Well I figured what better way to follow up my post on the Sarah that you love than with a post about that other thing you guys cherish, the God-given right to carry a fire-arm and blow someone’s head off.

    Enjoy! :-)

  • 231. poolman  |  January 12, 2011 at 2:28 am

    Well now that the dust has settled a little, we can see that it is still a battle between supposed conservatives and supposed liberals. Both sides are not innocent nor hold the righteous position. Nor do either one of them own or know the truth. I went through BiW’s recent post and thought it funny. Funny ha ha. I could easily substitute conservative for liberal and make the same rant. As a matter of fact, I have. The meanings of words is probably my biggest rant against those who consider themselves right wing. If we cannot understand the very language we speak, how can we expect clarity of thought and concept? And we want all peoples that live here to learn it and use it. Yet the government and politicians along with the media are the greatest distorters of real meanings. I have found many examples on this very blog, some right in this thread.

    We are all responsible for what we say and post. We generally say things to evoke an emotional response of one kind or another. We are responsible for that, even if we do not accept the blame of how others respond to it. I don’t think we always think things all the way through or understand cause and effect very well. A public figure has a greater responsibility with this since it gets a broader audience. This is common sense. At least it should be.

    It appears this shooter was mentally unstable. He thought the government and the establishment for that matter was trying to brainwash him and everyone else in society. He became very paranoid. He questioned the meanings of words and reality.

    So regardless of whether this tragedy was provoked by any particular language, symbolism, or political angst, the fact that he felt MANipulated by America, especially those in authority and lashed out violently. This should serve as a warning to us of all the other potentional timebombs out there that our society has helped to propagate. It is not a healthy culture, so don’t expect healthy outcomes.

    Look at the reaction from this. One of the results is a surge on puchases of high capacity magazines for Glock pistols. Fear that they may be outlawed after this event is spawning those sales. What a sick country we live in. Politicians using this for political gain or to usurp rights and paranoid citizens rushing to get before the getting is gone. It just amazes me in where a so called “Christian nation” places their trust. Yeah, we’re evolving in a better and more civilized direction. Not.

    Rutherford, I reread your post and must say although it is heavy on the Palin criticism, It isn’t what all these “conservatives” claim it is. It appears you are just ranting at her public persona and mainly her PR people. It is legitimate and even some of the examples showing the left hate and violent words/symbols others have posted are valid, too.

    However, like I said before, Palin is an emotionally charged topic. She brings out the worst in folks. I don’t know if she brings out the best in anything. I’ll have to think on that a bit. Actually I wish we didn’t have to think about her at all. If she would fade out of the news, it would suit me just fine. I know she won’t, though. There is too much invested in her to date.

  • 232. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    Hey Poolman, since you are my fav conspiracy fan, let me run this scenario by you and have you give it a score of 1 to 10 on the likely conspiracy scale (10 being most likely):

    Cops search home of Jared Loughner and find Palin crosshairs map taped up on the wall of his bedroom. Cops don’t disclose the “find” and bury any evidence of it.. America never finds out about this. [Twilight Zone theme song begins now.]

  • 233. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2011 at 1:17 pm

    I will say this for Sarah Palin: she and her speech writers know how to deliver the goods to her base. In her first lengthy public statement on the tragedy posted today on … wait for it … Facebook (with corresponding video on Vimeo .. I guess YouTube is too mainstream :lol: ) she calls for no change in public discourse. In fact, she basically says crosshairs on a map is the American way! Her response today tells me exactly why her fans love her.

    In the words of Bruce Springsteen: “No retreat baby, no surrender!”

    http://vimeo.com/18698532

  • 234. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 12, 2011 at 1:32 pm

    Or, for people who want the substance and not the Rutherford gloss-over, there is the transcript and video.

    http://adriennescatholiccorner.blogspot.com/2011/01/outstanding-speech-by-sarah-palin.html

    It was all good, and spot on, but this was my favorite part:

    President Reagan said, “We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election.
    The last election was all about taking responsibility for our country’s future. President Obama and I may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming the health of our democratic process. Two years ago his party was victorious. Last November, the other party won. In both elections the will of the American people was heard, and the peaceful transition of power proved yet again the enduring strength of our Republic.
    Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. 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.

    Those who would rush to waive the bloody shirt are seemingly oblivious to what they have on their own hands,

  • 235. poolman  |  January 12, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    Hey Poolman, since you are my fav conspiracy fan, let me run this scenario by you and have you give it a score of 1 to 10 on the likely conspiracy scale (10 being most likely):

    Cops search home of Jared Loughner and find Palin crosshairs map taped up on the wall of his bedroom. Cops don’t disclose the “find” and bury any evidence of it.. America never finds out about this. [Twilight Zone theme song begins now.]

    Funny that. I don’t expect that to be the case. But who knows? I’d give that a 5. They say he was honing in on Giffords only. Yet the amount of ammo he had tells me he was out to kill many more than just her. It seems for the past 3 years she has been aquainted with him and since his first encounter with her at one of the same type of meets. I find it interesting that he only recently established the youtube page (October) and recently friended her on her site. I really don’t think the Palin map had an impact here. Just my personal opinion.

    There is much going around about how the Sheriff knew this guy was off his rocker and had made numerous death threats, yet nothing was done. I guess that may or may not come out. The college also had numerous issues with him and several teachers and students were afraid of him, thinking he was potentially dangerous.

    Conspiracy theorists are going further and claiming he was a manchurian candidate. Some claim all the evidence found at his house was planted, etc. He had a link to “truther” information. Some in the “truther” movement think it may be a prelude for authorities to crack down on them as dangerous. Guilt by association of sorts. Some were also claiming this was a hate crime against a Jew, since Giffords was half Jewish, though that is being debated by others claiming she wasn’t a “true Jew”. Some say she supported the zionist agenda, while others say she opposed it.

    With all this speculation and with the involvement of the FBI, the truth may never be known. Plenty are claiming that if Loughner gets “offed” then he was definitely a plant. If that happens, I would put this closer to a 10 on your conspiracy scale.

    I don’t know enough to speculate here. I still don’t get how this guy could have legally obtained a firearm based on his record of crazy and his documented threats. That is the biggest issue I have with this whole scenerio. Who authorized it? That is where heads should roll, imho.

  • 236. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 12, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    “Cops search home of Jared Loughner and find Palin crosshairs map taped up on the wall of his bedroom. Cops don’t disclose the “find” and bury any evidence of it.. America never finds out about this.”

    Yeah, there is definitely a coverup going on regarding that police force.

    But it isn’t the one you think it is.

    How long are you going to ignore this?

  • 237. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    but this was my favorite part:

    It figures that your fav part would include the money shot — “blood libel”.

    Yes, I know, Sarah has been persecuted like the Jews.

    Like I said, true to form, she didn’t retreat, she reloaded.

  • 238. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    Actually, Huck Pima County office has told the press as of today that there had been visits to the Loughner home by police, details forthcoming. We knew the dude had been kicked out of community college within a day or so of the incident. And just to be clear, my comment to Poolman was 98% in jest. I don’t have any reason to believe this loony tune ever heard of Sarah Palin.

    Poolman, the problem with background checks is that not all municipalities are prompt in updating the database so it is very possible that someone with even a criminal past might get through because his database record is out of date.

    P.S. Dag, i didn’t know such elaborate conspiracy theories were already hatching about the dude. Gotta love it. I do agree that Loughner better live to see trial or the conspiracy fans will go bonkers.

  • 239. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  January 12, 2011 at 4:53 pm

    It figures that your fav part would include the money shot — “blood libel”.

    And it figures that your response would indicate that your cranium represents a new upper limit standard for the Mohs Scale.

  • 240. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2011 at 5:25 pm

    LOL … BiW I love it when you make me Google. At least I can get a bit smarter interacting with you. ;-)

  • 241. fakename2  |  January 12, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    I didn’t even know “blood libel” was a real thing until about two hours ago. I figured it was just another Palinism. Now that I know what it means, I’m shocked…by Palin.
    And Tex, if you’re already a reporter for a mainstream publication, then you are mainstream, whether or not you get quoted by some other mainstream publication/media outlet. Take a course in logic, already.

  • 242. Rutherford  |  January 17, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    The money quote from James Poniewozik, TV critic for Time magazine:

    If Jared Loughner were somehow definitively proved to have acted for reasons entirely unrelated to violent political rhetoric, would that violent rhetoric suddenly become any better? No. Here’s a good rule of thumb: if you’re looking at a campaign graphic and thinking, “How bad would this look if somebody tried to kill one of the people on this map tomorrow?”–guess what? It’s probably a bad idea.

    Read more

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


January 2011
M T W T F S S
« Dec   Feb »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
Bookmark and Share

Categories

Rutherford on Twitter

The Rutherford Lawson Blog is a member of

WordPress Political Blogger

My Sister Site

Town Called Dobson Daily Preview
AddThis Feed Button
http://www.blog4mobile.com/

Recent BlogCatalog Readers

View My Profile View My Profile View My Profile

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 711 other followers

%d bloggers like this: