WN: Death Threats Against Sarah Palin at 'Unprecedented Level,&#3

[Burning_Ember]

These leftist loons who are blaming Palin and Limbaugh need to think about the fact that they are dangerously close to being guilt of slander/libel and those are prosecutable offenses. If they don't want to end up in court, I would think it wise for them to cease and desist. Any further attempts to linking them to this shooting and laying the blame on their doorstep could be grounds for not a few lawsuits.

I haven't seen anyone blame Palin and Limbaugh for this shooting. The name calling doesn't help help anything.

The only accusation I've seen leveled is that an atmosphere of violent rhetoric can breed violence. There are indeed several cases in which criminals talked about how they were inspired by such rhetoric. This case with Jared Loughner, obviously, was not.

I can only say from experience that in Canada, things are discussed very reasonable manner regarding politics. Seeming to be as a result from this, we have far less political violence. In Canada, our culture does not nearly have the same glorification of such subjects as the Second Amendment do in America, nor does Revolution or armed uprising get wistfully looked upon as potential solution in politics.

You need look no farther than other posts on this message board to see people wondering if "it's time for another revolution". With more violent speech, would that somehow lead to less violence? Unfortunately, no.

[Guest shiloh357]

I haven't seen anyone blame Palin and Limbaugh for this shooting. The name calling doesn't help help anything.

I have seen it. It is all over the news.

The only accusation I've seen leveled is that an atmosphere of violent rhetoric can breed violence.

Well, you haven't been pay close enough attention.

There are indeed several cases in which criminals talked about how they were inspired by such rhetoric.

Yeah that is an excuse they employ hoping it will help get them off the hook.

I can only say from experience that in Canada, things are discussed very reasonable manner regarding politics. Seeming to be as a result from this, we have far less political violence.

We have something called "robust" debate. We don't threaten people or encourage violence.

In Canada, our culture does not nearly have the same glorification of such subjects as the Second Amendment do in America, nor does Revolution or armed uprising get wistfully looked upon as potential solution in politics.

You will note that WE do not have "God Save the Queen" as part of any of our national celebrations. The Queen is not our Head of State, and you will also note that we do not have a Governor General as a representative of Britain in our country either. There is something to be said for the courage, intestinal fortitude, and rugged individualism that made America what it is and helped us break all ties with the British Crown. I realize that is not something you cupcakes would understand.

You need look no farther than other posts on this message board to see people wondering if "it's time for another revolution". With more violent speech, would that somehow lead to less violence? Unfortunately, no.

That does not come up with "violent speech."

[Burning_Ember]

I have seen it. It is all over the news.

Well, you haven't been pay close enough attention.

I've been paying pretty close attention. I've seen Sarah Palin referenced quite a bit. When I have seen, for example, the map with the crosshairs referenced, I haven't seen it used to blame her.

Virtually every statement I've seen in regards to that, for example, is in the context of "Of course, this is not so say that she is in any way responsible for these shootings in any way. Was it in poor taste, in hindsight? Yes. After such violence, does such violent imagery seem appropriate to use? No."

Was it appropriate to use gunsights on that map? IN hindsight, I don't think it was.

Yeah that is an excuse they employ hoping it will help get them off the hook.

While that's a nice brush-off, motives for crimes do in fact matter.

We have something called "robust" debate. We don't threaten people or encourage violence.

We have robust and on occasion very partisan debate, but at the end of the day we are not so divided that the government is hindered as the American Congress is by partisanship to simply not accomplish things. We have to work together and get things done. If by robust debate, you mean louder discussion, I'd have to agree, but debate is only the means to achieving an ends, being passing legislation. I think we both agree it isn't exactly efficient, especially when arguing at such an increased robustness results in less getting done.

I was speaking of the usage of violent imagery and language. You'll note wishing for another Revolution is, in fact, wishing for violence. Maybe people just don't think that through all the way.

There is a fairly basic psychological principle that states if people wish or focus on something, they are more likely to be involved with it. If a few fringe individuals think constantly about guns and revolution and tyranny, are they somehow less likely to be violent, as opposed to more?

You will note that WE do not have "God Save the Queen" as part of any of our national celebrations. The Queen is not our Head of State, and you will also note that we do not have a Governor General as a representative of Britain in our country either. There is something to be said for the courage, intestinal fortitude, and rugged individualism that made America what it is and helped us break all ties with the British Crown. I realize that is not something you cupcakes would understand.

You'll note that "God save the Queen" is not part of our national celebrations either. Our Countries simply took different routes. If you are going to be indignant and invoke patriotism, please at least be accurate.

One American I met who moved from the South rather liked living here. I asked him specifically, "Don't you guys have more freedom, as it regards gun ownership?" He responded;

"One might think that freedom would be owning all the guns you want, so you can protect yourself to be safe. I've found that freedom is living somewhere where you don't have to own a gun be to be safe."

Canada has a homicide rate about 1/3rd of that in America, but indeed, culturally we are more peaceful. You might even say it is because we are a collection of some kind of sweet, baked goods.

Canada and the US are very close, however. If there was more legal focus on Rights vs Responsibility in one country as opposed to the other, In America, there is more emphasis on rights, in Canada there is more emphasis on Responsibility. Speech, especially when said

Is it necessary for you to attempt to be condescending and insulting like that? It's really not helping you make your case.

That does not come up with "violent speech."

Then please describe to me what people refer to when they say it's time for another revolution (on occasion I've heard the words civil war used) in America, and how what they refer to involves no violence. What is a revolution?

The broader point that I've seen in the media is that simply arguing with such "robust debate" might not be worth it, if at the end we can't work together to solve problems that we all face. It's a fairly valuable lesson, really. It's not 'us versus them'. It's all of us, working together. Because no matter who gets elected to office, we suffer the consequences if they can't get along to accomplish things.

[MorningGlory]

Some of us think differently than the rampant partisans. That's the beauty of the American way......we're free to do so.

From a secular point of view you are entirely correct. It is certainly an American freedom that we enjoy to support whomever we wish. No argument from me there.

But from a spiritual standpoint, not so much. Our allegiance is suppose to be to a much higher power than the government or any one person within it. Obama has already proven himself, time and again to be directly opposed to God, and Christ. No person who claims to be a Christian should be supporting him in any way, shape or form.

You're right, we believers should give our allegiance to the Lord, above any and all else. I believe most of us do that, Cobalt. Just because some of us think differently doesn't make us any less devout than those who see Obama as the greatest threat to the country.

[MorningGlory]

I haven't seen anyone blame Palin and Limbaugh for this shooting. The name calling doesn't help help anything.

Then you haven't had your sights trained on American media as you usually do.

I can only say from experience that in Canada, things are discussed very reasonable manner regarding politics. Seeming to be as a result from this, we have far less political violence. In Canada, our culture does not nearly have the same glorification of such subjects as the Second Amendment do in America, nor does Revolution or armed uprising get wistfully looked upon as potential solution in politics.

When will you figure out that Canadians and Americans are very different in many ways....regardless of our common ancestry.

You need look no farther than other posts on this message board to see people wondering if "it's time for another revolution". With more violent speech, would that somehow lead to less violence? Unfortunately, no.

You won't understand it but revolution is part of the fabric of the U.S. and an integral part of the American psyche. We are who we are and nothing you say will affect that. You really don't understand our country.

[Burning_Ember]

Then you haven't had your sights trained on American media as you usually do.

You'd be surprised.

When will you figure out that Canadians and Americans are very different in many ways....regardless of our common ancestry.

You won't understand it but revolution is part of the fabric of the U.S. and an integral part of the American psyche. We are who we are and nothing you say will affect that. You really don't understand our country.

Revolution was integral to America back when it needed to separate itself from Britain. Advocating it now isn't useful, anyone advocating it really hasn't thought it through.

I understand very much so that it is part of the fabric of how the US was formed and part the American psyche, but it is no longer the 18th Century. Think about what a Revolution, a civil war would require for a moment. You would need to beat what the American Military has now, AND be able to win popular support of the people.

There is no Britain to rebel from. Society has no need to rebel from a Government which it is democratically represented by. What are people going to say, that people should rebel against the people they elected? Military technology is far past a point where a Revolution could possibly be carried out. In a world where no country in the world could dream of a successfully non-nuclear war against America, how could a revolution possibly be carried out without getting around the most powerful military in the world?

Revolution worked in 1776 against the major military power precisely because sheer military power could be bested by tactics, popular support, and communication was not instant. The advancement of technology has rendered it impossible to use the latter three.

That's why it's disappointing to see people wishing for another revolution. Do I understand why? Yes, believe me, I do, even if I don't agree. Without any real legal foothold and without a military more powerful than what America has, along with a lack of near unified support of the people against a tyrannical Government... Which, I might add, only exists in the fantasies of the fringe... It would be the greatest failure that ever occurred.

[nebula]

I haven't seen anyone blame Palin and Limbaugh for this shooting.

Sarah Palin Blamed by Bloggers for Shooting of Gabrielle Giffords

5 days ago

Matt Lewis

Columnist

Almost immediately after the nation learned of the shooting of Arizona Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and several others (including a federal judge), a few prominent liberal web writers sought to blame Sarah Palin and other conservatives for the action.

Linking to a map of U.S. House districts that Sarah Palin's pac wanted to "target" during the 2010 mid-term elections -- which sadly included crosshairs over Rep. Giffords' district (among others) -- DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas Tweeted, "Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin." <<--LINK

The liberal blog Firedog Lake also went there. <<--Link

Source - read more here

Another article on this with examples

I can only say from experience that in Canada, things are discussed very reasonable manner regarding politics. Seeming to be as a result from this, we have far less political violence.

You guys actually do talk about Canadian politics? Golly, I've only heard you talk about ours.

You need look no farther than other posts on this message board to see people wondering if "it's time for another revolution". With more violent speech, would that somehow lead to less violence? Unfortunately, no.

"Revolution" and "assassination" are not the same thing.

By the way, did you see the posted article about all the death threats being sent out against Sarah Palin? What do you make of those?

[Guest yod]

I'm sick of this 'blame game' stuff and I was glad to hear the President call for stopping it.

That is naive if you know his character and history. He's only waiting for the right time to exploit this for a fascist agenda.

It does look like Bill Clinton is mentoring him now, though.

You are blinded by your dislike of the man.....do you ever see 'glass half full' or are you terminally negative?

During the election, Obama verbally advocated getting away from the smear campaigning. However, his election team did nothing but smear campaign. He himself was able to avoid it because the others working for him did that. If he was sincere about getting away from smear campaigning, he should have rebuked his workers from doing such. He should have taken charge as the leader and made them quit it. But he didn't.

I am glad he advocated laying aside the blame game. However, it remains to be seen whether he will lead others out of this or not.

I dislike the wicked, I dislike evil, I dislike liars, crooks, theives and murders. If YOU think the shoe fits, then yes, I dislike anyone who has any of those characteristics.

I'm ready to lay money on Obama taking political advantage of this event. We'll hear about chilling free speech from his cronies within a week. We'll hear about diminishing the 2nd Amendment within a month.

He's soooo predictable if you are willing to see the truth. It's scary as hell but staring you in the face.

[Burning_Ember]

Sarah Palin Blamed by Bloggers for Shooting of Gabrielle Giffords

5 days ago

Matt Lewis

Columnist

Almost immediately after the nation learned of the shooting of Arizona Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and several others (including a federal judge), a few prominent liberal web writers sought to blame Sarah Palin and other conservatives for the action.

Linking to a map of U.S. House districts that Sarah Palin's pac wanted to "target" during the 2010 mid-term elections -- which sadly included crosshairs over Rep. Giffords' district (among others) -- DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas Tweeted, "Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin." <<--LINK

The liberal blog Firedog Lake also went there. <<--Link

Source - read more here

Another article on this with examples

Perhaps I should rephrase that. Yes, Blogs on the internet, for sure. To be fair, if this was a post random links of people, we could go on all day posting links to blogs and message boards. To be more specific, I'm referring more to MSNBC, CNN, FOX News, ABC, NBC, or people with Radio programs with somewhat sizable audiences. Even in people on the left with more unabashed ways of presenting things, like Cenk Uygur stopped short of blaming Sarah Palin. The way he expressed things was still a little vitriolic, but he preceded most every mention of the shooting with "This person is obviously TOTALLY nuts", and the closest he came to blaming the Tea Party was by saying the closest he could correspond anything Loughner talked about to anything actual movement was akin to the Sovereign Citizens movement. Whereas the Tea Party believes Government should be limited, The Sovereign Citizens movement believes they are not subject to the government.

When it comes to mainstream political figures on the left versus the right in America, most have been acting like adults. El Rushbo and Beck, and Palin are not.

After hearing what Rush talked about on Monday, I canceled my Rush 24/7 Subscription. He makes good points here and there, but Monday was a lot of Garbage.

You guys actually do talk about Canadian politics? Golly, I've only heard you talk about ours.

Canadians do! The problem being that most issues of concern take no more than a couple weeks to solve at the federal level, with a couple exceptions taking maybe a month if it is a crisis, or it may recur a couple times if the problem ends up getting worse. Since they get solved so quickly (whether it be issues of increasing/lowering taxes, budget issues, increased/decreased spending) they don't stay as topics of conversation for very long. You'll talk about it a few times, and it'll be over. Things like the healthcare bill, the 9/11 healthcare bill, or the START treaty taking more than 6 months to pass is unheard of.

Combine that with bipartisanship and media that is more oriented towards reporting fact instead of partisan opinion... Things end up getting done, and we end up devoting our time on other hobbies.

"Revolution" and "assassination" are not the same thing.

By the way, did you see the posted article about all the death threats being sent out against Sarah Palin? What do you make of those?

If one person is trying to start a revolution, they don't have much in the way of options, and an assassination is on a list of things requiring the least resources, but causing the most chaos.

The death threats were pretty despicable. Don't get caught up in the blame game though... You need look no further than the article by Boyce Watkins you posted to see an example of death threats going the other direction.

I made a conscious decision three years ago to stop appearing on FOX News, and it wasn't just because the network is a disgrace to modern journalism. I was also uncomfortable with the hundreds of nasty death threats I'd receive in my e-mail, after each appearance on the network.

Somehow, I think the more Christian approach is not letting hate fester in a vitriolic atmosphere where death threats get thrown around. Sometimes, someone less balanced might act on that, as has happened in the past. We should be treating others as we wish to be treated, rather than calling each other Nazi Socialist Communist Anarchist Fascists who hate America.

I've been guilty of taking the low road myself on these boards, and it's not productive. We're all brothers and sisters in Christ, and sometimes, I think we forget that.

[other one]

revolution right now would just be playing into the hands of globalists. There is no way you could get enough people together to create any kind of revolutionary force without the FBI and/or CIA finding out about it.

Think about what we saw in Iraq and think about how easy the military would/could put down any arned groups. It would just signal them that it's time for martial law. With most of our own troups out of the country fighting someone elese way, they would just move UN troops from Russia, China and Germany here to put it down.

Revolution talk is not wise.