Sarah Palin's hit list

http://www.examiner.com/social-media-in-national/sarah-palin-posts-political-hit-list-on-facebook-taking-a-stand-or-suggesting-violence

Today the worst job must be Sarah Palin's Facebook censor. Posts are almost quicker deleted than posted - even a prayer for the victims was deleted.

And of course the brutal political murder of at least six people in Arizona had nothing to do with the far-right madness of the Tea Party and the rest of Sarah Palin (and Geert Wilders') friends.

Disgusting.

The Left is saying political rhetoric should be toned down, that putting crosshairs on senator districts and stating that constituents should "reload" goes too far. The Right insists there is no direct connection to that and the shootings. They refuse to admit the post was over the top, distasteful or in any way inciting. Meanwhile, Palin and her people took that page offline immediately after the shooting occurred. If that is not a sign of recognizing her own culpability, I don't know what is. I can only hope the pressure on her remains and that the critically wounded congresswoman heals, goes back to work in the House and continues to cast votes according to her beliefs.

Beyond all that is the agony other families involved must endure. They're all heartbreaking, but the worst has to be the death of that 9 year old girl, taken there by a neighbor to be a part of something exciting to her. This little girl was born into terrorism - on September 11, 2001 - and died at its hand. I can't imagine the pain her family is going through.

On top of all this, the shooter, apparently, obtained his weapons legally despite his criminal record and his - easily uncovered - mental instability.

So many things contributed to this horrendous act. I doubt any one of them will be directly addressed or changed.

Well, what can I say... other than that I just can sit here seeing my own country changing in what the US already is right now. And that hurts!!

Oh, and btw... if America somehow (and it's not unlikely) manages this woman as the next President of America, then I really can't take the USA seriously anyway.

We are, and will be affected for years (for so many reasons), regarding the Tucson incident.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords spoke out last year about the 'half governor's' hit list and her fears.  What the Reich Wing of this company has needed to realize for years is that their banter fuels the fringe.  Timothy McVie, the man who flew a plane into an IRS building in Texas, etc........words fuel the hate of the lunatics who may act.  Tea Party members who show up with guns at a Presidential appearance, fueled by the hate speech from excessively rich 'John Birch' proponents, and along the lines of taking matters into their own hands using 'Second Amendment remedies'.........it's frickin scary.

Don't get me started regarding 'birthers', Westboro Baptists, antiabortion bombers and murderers (thanks, BillO), arsonists of mosques and churches and temples..............

Just as bad as the ultra left wing eco-terrorists fueled by the cowardly rhetoric of webmasters and bloggers.

I haven't liked what my employers, elected representatives, union officials, etc ......have done at times.  I've been outraged at times.  Using violence and breaking the law has never happened (though the fantasy of it has entered my mind....sorry, Jimmy Carter;-))

They all are just using their First Amendment rights concerning freedom of speech.  Just like Hitler did ('hey, I never killed anyone.  They were just 'words'.)

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me........unless your words condone violence and someone else follows up on them."

btw.........I hate that phrase.  Physical and verbal abuse still leave scars that last forever.

MLK and Ghandi used words.  Peaceful remedies.  It worked........eventually.

You may disagree with me.  Fine.  Please try to use an intelligent presentation, based on facts,  without shouting or raising your voice, to correct or change my opinion.  I may disagree with you.  Fine.  I will try to use an intelligent presentation, based on facts, without shouting or raising my voice, to correct or change your opinion.  At the end, if we still disagree, at least we have both learned something, still have mutual respect, might have actually learned something, and can move on to something else.

my .06 pence.  thanks for reading.

The Mir@cle wrote: Well, what can I say... other than that I just can sit here seeing my own country changing in what the US already is right now. And that hurts!!

Oh, and btw... if America somehow (and it's not unlikely) manages this woman as the next President of America, then I really can't take the USA seriously anyway. reply:
i havent taken America seriously since Clinton left office...just wish our government would end the "special relationship" it gets us into more shit than required

Whenever you see or hear from Sarah Palin, just remember this.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/3-invisible-dicks

She has never said anything insightful or helpful in her entire life as a public figure.  The picture sums her up pretty well.

In a strange way I think the election of Obama nudged the door open wider for electing a whole lot of people for any number of reasons largely irrelevant to actual suitability for the office. Still, it's pretty tough to imagine any path that leads Sarah Palin directly to the presidency, though she'll probably be a kingmaker in 2012.  On the other hand,  American culture is so tied to ideas of success and winning that the best way to get rid of Sarah Palin might be to engineer letting her run for President.  They don't generally let you try again. A significant contrast to many parliamentary democracies where you can have a leader of the opposition for years through multiple election cycles.

1960: America elects a Catholic president --> the reactionary part of the country (i.e. the bigots and other pond-scum) starts arming, organizing and terrorizing. We call this "massive resistance" or "the white backlash".

2008: America elects a black president --> the reactionary part of the country (i.e. the bigots and other pond-scum) starts arming, organizing and terrorizing. We call this "the Tea Party".

To be quite honest, you'd be forgiven for not realizing that this is 2010 and not 1866. The Tea Party reminds me of nothing quite so much as unreconstructed confederates: backwards, violent, and hell-bent on revenge even at the cost of destroying the country.

I've found myself almost unable to bear the rhetoric of these last few days, of which the above is a shining example.  The irony of the politicized and reductionist bashing of 'Tea Partiers' for their alleged dangerous reductionist bashing is pretty rich.  The development of a personality that seeks to carry out assassination and mass murder is a long and complex process and there is absolutely no indication at this time to what degree, if any, the political climate spurred him on.

The gunsight imagery never struck me as particularly violent in any real sense anyway as the people she was trying to find resonance with are the people who associate weapons with concepts like freedom and independence and self sufficiency and all that other happy stuff that supports the rather shocking ability of Americans to do eggs/milk/Glock runs just about any day of the week.  Any future in which the culture as a whole is peeled from guns and entrenched militarism and the everyday language and metaphors that go along with it  is far enough away that it is at least as valuable to talk about the real and practical ways in which this could have been avoided or mitigated .  Mental health services and educating people about human behaviour that prevents individuals from taking action when so many people clearly knew this guy was deeply unstable would be a good start.

GratefulFan wrote: I've found myself almost unable to bear the rhetoric of these last few days, of which the above is a shining example.  The irony of the politicized and reductionist bashing of 'Tea Partiers' for their alleged dangerous reductionist bashing is pretty rich.  The development of a personality that seeks to carry out assassination and mass murder is a long and complex process and there is absolutely no indication at this time to what degree, if any, the political climate spurred him on.

I think the "bashing" of tea partiers comes from the shock of the assassination. Since the election of President Obama the democrats had to bear the hateful vitriolic outbursts of parts of this movement. Obama is a muslim, not an American, a communist, the Anti-Christ. This is not about a political discussion or competition of ideas: it's pure and simple hatred against the elected leader. Apparently, some democrats already were scared before the shooting as the interview of Mrs Giffords in March shows - it was on NBC after her office was vandalized after her health care vote:

"Community leaders, figures in our community need to say “look, we can’t stand for this.”  This is a situation where — people don’t — they really need to realize that the rhetoric and firing people up and, you know, even things, for example, we’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list. But the thing is that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gunsight over our district.  And when people do that, they’ve gotta realize there’s consequences to that action."

Although Mrs Gifford's office was attacked and she expressed her worry about the target list, Sarah Palin did not "retreat" - she ignored the worries of an elected American Congresswoman and continued with her campaign. There is no excuse for such behaviour. It does not matter if she inspired the killer or not. After Mrs. Gifford's office had been vandalized, every politician in the country should have pledged for a less violent discourse.

>>> YourValentine wrote: After Mrs. Gifford's office had been vandalized, every politician in the country should have pledged for a less violent discourse. <<<
.
They should have but that would have taken courage, common sense and a stronger desire to do what was right than what was politically advantageous. Riling the public is such an easy thing to do. Frighten them. Give them something or someone to hate and they'll follow you, they'll wait for the next bit of gossip they can spread - and spin.

A frighteningly large number of people in this country have shown not only their ignorance but also their hatred of the very country they say they want to 'take back' from those who would prefer to take it forward. This country is supposed to be one that supports expression of opposing views. It's supposed to be one in which 'all men are created equal.' The religious right - which is loudest, which supports Palin and her ilk, which are so pro-gun they bring automatic weapons to speeches made by the president - has clearly showcased the opposite of what this country is supposed to be.

They are mostly 'christian' yet show little to no 'christian' values. They mock their opponents with immature, inciting remarks then bluster when called on it. Palin's 8-minute, narcissistic response to the accusations are the latest proof of that. It's about her. Just like her followers - it's about them. Not country, not fellow man. And when this president - a man they clearly hate and are working above all else to make a "one-term president" - says anything, he's derided in the most disrespectful way. How can there be anything but discourse when the President of the United States is insulted - even heckled - behind his back and to his face by members of Congress - people who represent the people. Even Bush - for all his lies, for all the hatred he single-handedly brought America from around the world - was not treated so disrespectfully by representatives.

The republicans and teabaggers are so enraged that this president and the last congress should dare put through a bill that helps people - gives them a chance at quality health coverage - that they put gun sites on blue districts, told their followers to reload, told them if the election came out wrong they might have to turn to second amendment remedies, said "if ballots don't work, bullets will", "if we haven't achieved substantial victory, I mean it, I'm going to gather together men and women who understand that some things are worth fighting for and some things are worth dying for".

They've lied, outright and, when presented with facts, refuse to acknowledge those lies. And their followers are angry enough to do the same. There are no "death panels", there are no "headless bodies in the Arizona desert", there was no $200 million per day expense for the president's trip to India. It's all lies meant to stir resentment and discontent. Yet a member of congress has the balls to shout to this president, "You lie."

We don't know what set off this guy in Arizona. It may not be connected to the hate spewed by these politicians. And yet, the people clearly want the hate speeches to stop. They want dialogue. They want compromise and forward movement. They want to be led by level-headed people. By adults. Sadly, at this time, this country has only a handful of adults in positions of power.

I was reading an article on this kid this morning.  He had many police reports due to his disruptive and threatening behavior in his classes at the community college.  So ... a person has to wonder what the laws are in Arizona with respect to putting a person in a mental facility against their will.  If you ever watch any real-life police shows, you realize just how many people "out there" are crazy.   Some are maybe temporarily crazy due to drugs or circumstances that just send them over the edge.  But this guy had teachers noticing his behavior over a period of time.  

It seems very similar to the Virginia Tech shooting situation to me.  This guy happened to choose the congresswoman's event, and maybe some of the Tea Party stuff did get into his head and confuse him.  But, I say it could have been any number of places he could have chosen instead - possibly the community college classroom or a local military recruiting station.  Time will tell, I guess (what his motivation was).  

I feel sorry for the shooter's family, the victims, and the families of these victims.  But notice how quickly politicians have politicized this event, which is probably very confusing to the typical person on the street.  Obama is already campaigning and while I appreciate that he attended the memorial service, I also see it as being in bad taste at the same time - because he was underlining the political aspect of the situation, which nobody knows for sure is even part of what set this guy off.  Making this about "America" and "American values" and "working together" is just turning a tragic situation into a political campaign slogan. 

Billions of dollars are going into Homeland Security and this is being overseen by the current administration.  Avoiding another incident such as this and the Virginia Tech shootings should be part of every public person's training.  The police at local levels and others in positions to catch this sort of thing before it is too late need to stay up to date on the latest training and procedures (if they exist).  Like I said, billions are going into homeland security and some of that has to be getting down to the local level (the funding for training programs, etc.)  So, instead of placing all blame on a person who is not even in authority (Sarah Palin), I would look at who is in authority and who does have the power:  Obama, the governor of Arizona, the local police, Homeland Security (Janet Nepolitano), Congress (who should have figured out by now that representatives might need security at events), etc. etc. etc.

If Palin becomes President, I am moving to Germany to live with Barb.