I know I shouldn't be surprised that a shooting incident has brought forth such an outpouring of stupidity and intellectual dishonesty, but it is surprising in its intensity. Here's what we know so far, from what I've read. The shooter was an unstable individual with a penchant for conspiracy theories, and a specific grudge against Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. That's really all we know for sure. But that hasn't stopped an amazing eruption of complete nonsense, mostly from the left and its enablers in the media. The ridiculous speculation that violent political imagery -- which is nothing new and no more intense than it has been in the past -- is somehow responsible for this incident, is actually being seriously discussed, instead of receiving the derisive laughter it deserves. People seething with intense hatred for Sarah Palin, who know full-well she had no connection whatsoever to this incident, have shamelessly tried to smear her with responsibility. Then there are the usual idiots who pretend that if we just passed another gun law, somehow these incidents could be avoided.
Unless some sort of multi-person conspiracy is unearthed, or a clear motivating ideology, as in the case of radical Islamists, this incident can be best explained by the same explanation that applies to most such one-person shooting sprees: nuts do crazy things. When you have someone whose outlook on life and reality is so out of whack that he's willing to kill a bunch of random people just to get someone he's formed a grudge against, there's no telling what might set him off. The idea, in the absence of any evidence, that he was somehow motivated by a politician or media figure you don't particularly like, even though those figures aren't actually calling for any violence, is utterly ludicrous. I believe most of the people pushing such theories know that, and are just behaving like the intellectually-dishonest hacks they are.
As much as I loathe Sarah Palin’s politics\religious views, I agree painting her as the primary instigator of the shooter is just stupid.
ReplyDeleteBut to say she (and her staffers) has not contributed to the general breakdown of civility and inflammatory rhetoric isn’t something that should be overlooked either:
“Ms Palin was called out for inciting violence against then Senator Obama, his wife and children during the 2008 campaign season. The Telegraph UK reported that the Secret Service asked her to walk it back as her rhetoric was causing an increase in death threats against the Obama family but she refused.”
“The ADN starts off with, “”RELOAD!” Sarah Palin shouted at right-wing supporters via Twitter on Tuesday after President Obama signed the House health care bill.”
“…a court warning Palin to cease and desist abusing her sister’s children by consistently and relentlessly disparaging their father to them was not enough to stop her. No, that was years before Troopergate ever happened. So, the courts don’t really stop Her Holy Self either. After all, God has anointed her, so our laws don’t really apply to her.”
“She was to blame for the spike in death threats against Obama and his family (including his children) failed to move Palin into toning down her rhetoric. Newsweek reported: ‘The attacks provoked a near lynch mob atmosphere at her rallies, with supporters yelling “terrorist” and “kill him” until the McCain campaign ordered her to tone down the rhetoric.”
If Palin had nothing to hide, then why are the crosshairs on her site gone? Why are her tweets being rewritten or disappearing?
Palin not necessarily the instigator. See this:
ReplyDeletehttp://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/08/my-congresswoman-voted-against-nancy-pelosi-and-is-now-dead-to-me-eerie-daily-kos-hit-piece-on-gabrielle-giffords-just-two-days-before-assassination-attempt-on-her/
"But to say she (and her staffers) has not contributed to the general breakdown of civility and inflammatory rhetoric"
ReplyDeleteIt should be obvious that I think that idea is laughable nonsense.
"If Palin had nothing to hide, then why are the crosshairs on her site gone? Why are her tweets being rewritten or disappearing?"
Because she's the target of a smear campaign and now has to try to avoid giving those who hate her anything they might be able to use as ammunition. Public figures in general tend to be pretty gutless when it comes to standing up and laughing at idiotic smear attempts.
Just in case I haven't been clear enough... Anyone who seriously thinks that crosshairs or targets, or any other such commonly-used symbols have anything to do with this shooting is a complete and utter moron.
'Anyone who seriously thinks that crosshairs or targets, or any other such commonly-used symbols have anything to do with this shooting is a complete and utter moron.'
ReplyDeleteI second the motion. What a joke that we even have to have this 'debate'