I automatically recoil at the suggestion that people should be held responsible for the actions of others, especially when it comes down to the influence they supposedly have on those they’ve never met. It’s the kind of Lieberman-esque thinking that brought us the culture wars, the scapegoating of video games and a decade’s worth of Ice-T demonization. As someone who did not emerge unscathed from that ignoble period in our history, I instinctively feel that the people who trade in those kinds of arguments are demagogues and hustlers.
And for those who want to attribute an overt conservative or liberal agenda to Jared Loughner — I’m not seeing it. Not saying it’s not there, just saying I don’t see it, at least not yet. I’m sure we’ll learn more over the coming days, but there wasn’t a political agenda behind the shootings at Columbine, or the Beltway Snipers, or Virginia Tech. When the target is a U.S. Congresswoman of course the context is different, but in the end it may be that Loughner’s conscious motives are as equally disturbed, idiosyncratic and non-political as those of the Columbine shooters.
So, it’s somewhat surprising, even to me, that I find myself here — saying that Sarah Palin’s handling of the whole Tucson shooting situation has been so utterly self-involved and reckless from start to finish that it should disqualify her from ever occupying a position of political leadership in this country again.
But, here I am.
In my defense, consider what what was happening in March of last year:
- Friday, March 19: Mike Vanderboegh of Pinson, Alabama, the former leader of the Alabama Constitutional Militia, puts out a call for modern “Sons of Liberty” to break the windows of Democratic Party offices nationwide in opposition to health care bill.
- Friday morning: Brick thrown through the Niagra Falls office of Rep. Louise Slaughter, who was also receiving threatening voice mail messages referring to a sniper.
- Friday night or Saturday morning: Brick thrown through the Democratic Party headquarters window in Wichita, Kansas with anti-Obama rhetoric written on it.
- Saturday, March 20: Brick thrown through the window of the Rochester, NY Democratic headquarters. Attached is a note with a Barry Goldwater quote: “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.”
- Sunday, March 21: A fist sized rock thrown through the window of the Hamilton County Democratic Party headquarters in Cincinnati, Ohio after the health care bill passes.
- Sunday, March 21: Front door of Gabby Giffords office smashed out, presumably by a brick or a pellet gun.
- Monday, March 22: Propane gas line severed at the house of Tom Periello’s brother by a self-identified Tea Party activist who believed Periello lived there.
- Following the health care vote: Bart Stupak receives a fax with with a drawing of a noose and an anonymous voice mail saying: “You’re dead. We know where you live. We’ll get you.” Betsy Markey receives telephone threats of violence. A man threatens to burn down John Boccieri’s house.
Here was John Boehner’s response:
I know many Americans are angry over this health-care bill, and that Washington Democrats just aren’t listening. But, as I’ve said, violence and threats are unacceptable. That’s not the American way. We need to take that anger and channel it into positive change. Call your congressman, go out and register people to vote, go volunteer on a political campaign, make your voice heard — but let’s do it the right way.
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and Ken Cuccinelli also condemned the vandalism. That’s the bare minimum the public should be able to expect from a political figure in the midst of a tense situation fraught with escalating violence.
So, what does Sarah Palin do? On March 23, on the heels of all this violence, she chooses to launch her campaign at TakeBackthe20.com with a map of 20 members of Congress in the crosshairs — including Giffords, Perriello and others who have just been targets.
A 9:30 am on March 23, she tweets: “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!”
At a time when other leaders in the Republican party are trying to turn down the heat, Palin decides to fuel the outrage to advance her own political influence in the next election. She sends out an unmistakeable signal: keep going. [cont'd.]
The climate of violence that provided the context for the actions of the Tucson shooter predates Sarah Palin’s entry onto the national political scene. The eliminationist rhetoric that enabled and advanced the wars on the Middle East, the amorality and nihilism perpetuated by the senseless violence we continue to inflict on our enemies — it certainly can’t be laid at her feet. The death of a 9 year-old girl at the hands of Jared Loughner is equally as tragic as those of the children gunned down in the Apache helicopter video. Yet one elicits outrage while the other gets shrugged off as some kind of sad necessity. Our cultural boundaries regarding “right” and “wrong” have become either totally arbitrary, or at best conditional. Why are we surprised with a soldier like Jesse Kelly comes back from Iraq and announces an M16 shooting event to “target” Gabby Giffords and “send her packing?
We reap what we sow.
None of that, however, excuses Sarah Palin’s complete and utter failure of responsible leadership in the situation. She says she did not intend for anyone to take her literally when she placed crosshairs over Gabby Giffords’ district on her target map, and I don’t doubt that’s true.
But the fact remains that at a time when members of Congress were on the receiving end of death threats and vandalism, Sarah Palin thought the time was ripe to turn them into political targets and press her advantage. Instead of assessing the situation appropriately and exercising restraint, she poured gasoline on the fire. She made the decision to further inflame and recklessly exhort her supporters to escalate, to “reload” rather than “retreat.”
Did she not understand she was speaking to a lot of people who were already at the brick throwing-phase? Or did she just not care?
Republican consultant Todd Harris, speaking about Palin’s crosshairs map and “reload” rhetoric, says that “politicians say these things because they work….The public, or at least segments of the public on the right and the left, respond to it. It raises money and builds organization.”
Anyone who has ever done political organizing of any kind knows that he’s right. When people are extremely emotional about something, that’s the time they’re willing to take action, sign up, donate. And that’s all Sarah Palin saw at the moment. She wanted to rally her supporters, build her organization, exercise her political muscle. Either she was oblivious to the potential for escalating violence, or she made a conscious decision to act in her own self-interest and ignore it.
Everyone makes mistakes. But anyone waiting for Sarah Palin to acknowledge she might have made one here is going to have some time on their hands. Following the Tucson shooting, Palin’s aide disingenuously claimed that the crosshairs were meant to represent a “surveyor’s symbol,” nothing more “We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sights. It was simply cross-hairs like you’d see on maps,” she told Tammy Bruce.
Come on. I think we all know what the word “reload” means. Palin herself has referred to the map targets as “bulls eye[s].” She’s keenly aware of what she said and what she meant when she said it, and has been scrubbing her internet presence of such references ever since the shooting.
Instead of taking responsibility an exercising leadership, however, she’s pushing aides into the media to tell whoppers to paint herself as the supreme victim. The “obscene” and “appalling” part of the shooting, apparently, is that Sarah Palin — a national political figure who ran for the Vice Presidency in 2008 — should be asked to address the fact that she literally painted Gabby Giffords in the crosshairs last year.
If Palin didn’t recognize the volatility of the situation at the time, Giffords certainly did. As she told MSNBC:
Community leaders, figures in our community need to say “look, we can’t stand for this.” …[W]e’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list…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.
I won’t speculate on the role Palin played in motivating the actions of Jared Loughner — nobody can know that for sure, probably not even him. But the irresponsible nature of Palin’s actions speak for themselves, and don’t need confirmation by outside events to qualify as alarming and foolhardy. You want to act recklessly? Fine, drive a race car. Put out oil fires. Climb the Himalayas. You do not have the maturity or the judgment to be President of the United States.
Further, Palin’s retreat into self-pity and victimization in the wake of the shooting demonstrates that she is utterly devoid of self-reflection, completely unable to acknowledge her failure to gauge the dangers inherent in the situation at the time, or learn from her mistakes. She acts like a sneaky teenager. She lies. She pushes others out there to take the hits for her, incapable of even acknowledging her role as a political leader who consciously exerts influence over how her followers should interpret and respond to events.
Sarah Palin’s political career is probably toast, due in large part to the fact that the GOP doesn’t want her messing up their plans for the next Presidential election like she did the 2010 Senate races. And the person who will regret her retreat from the political landscape more than anyone will be Barack Obama, who dreams nightly of a race against Palin in 2012. Gone will be the bright shiny object distraction of “look over there, it’s Sarah Palin!” from the broken promises of the Democratic establishment. The misogyny that so often fuels attacks on her from the left will happily join in the fray, as a bipartisan chorus comes together to write a political epitaph that will be widely celebrated across the political spectrum.
None of that will change the underlying dynamics that led to the shooting of 20 people at a Tucson supermarket. To repair that will require a much deeper foray into the national soul. But maybe it will serve as a cautionary tale for politicians willing to ride the dark side of populist anxiety to the top of the political heap at a time of economic hardship.
If Sarah Palin’s well-deserved flameout can save us from the ascendancy of a much smarter, more adept Sarah Palin in the future, at least until we can navigate some sort of intelligent path forward, her self-inflicted political implosion will have served us all well.







195 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Score!!!!
I’d like to know more about Todd Palin and his influence on things..things like her.
I can’t believe that she hasn’t already been sued for putting elected officials under cross hairs in that stupid map!
Oh… he just idolizes her.
Thanks for this Jane.
It wouldn’t be the first time that the end of a career like Palin’s is brought on by something the individual did not actually do
Her teevee show will not be renewed by TLC…as of yesterday. Heh!
Sarah Palin is a moron. And it was the evildoer John McCain who leached her into the political bloodstream of America. Too bad for us. But great for FOX, the invented news network. Peace
Remember the Glenn Beck episode where he poured ‘gasoline’ over some poor schmuck while rabbiting on about something hateful? I hope the careers of all these guys are now over.
Yeah. Excellent post.
I’ve already said that she and her handlers will find a way to spin this as Palin being a “Victim” here.
More broadly, we’re already seeing any mere critical mention of the inflammatory / eliminationist rhetoric coming from the right itself characterized as “hate speech” by the rightie spinners.
___
“Republican consultant Todd Harris, speaking about Palin’s crosshairs map and “reload” rhetoric, says that “politicians say these things because they work….The public, or at least segments of the public on the right and the left, respond to it. It raises money and builds organization.”
Anyone who has ever done political organizing of any kind knows that he’s right. When people are extremely emotional about something, that’s the time they’re willing to take action, sign up, donate…”
Precisely my observation when I made a project out of the execrable Sharron Angle.
Jane, what an excellent post. Palin will probably become a dirty word in many ways and if that finishes her crazy ranting, I’m for it.
I still think it reminds me of Columbine, because I read some FBI files on them online at the time, and they seem to have been influenced by a rightwing crazy group…long black coats or something like that.
I think you’re right about Palin’s career as a politician being over. But it may be she never had much of a future to begin with. She was of use to McCain to hold down the right so that he could run against Bush’s record. She’ll continue to be useful to Rubert Murdoch until someone else comes along. Her epitaph plain? She was only a pawn in their game.
Murdoch, Murdoch, Murdoch…most dangerous man in the US…maybe the world..Moon too.
I’m betting that Palin will not go away politically. She will end up as JEB’s Veep. Never underestimate the stupidity of the American electorate. Hence, JEB.
___
And, color me utterly unsurprised if she tries to turn this to her advantage as well.
Jeb will appear at some point I believe, but not with Palin…He’s a neocon..she’s somethin’ else. No, he’ll pick Petraeus or someone like that.
She didn’t care. She’s a sociopath, utterly devoid of shame and conscience. I got banned from the Huffington Post for making an argument to this effect, in large part using evidence from that same publication, but it’s true. Check this out, from October 13, 2008:
Coming from someone who uses her seven-year-old daughter as a human shield, nothing should surprise us.
The psychologists call it “primary process lying” – that is, for them lying is as natural as breathing.
…or Liz Cheney.
The oligarchy loves these people and pays them well. The pro-capitalist types with big mouths and small brains who will say whatever they’re told to say. Especially when what they have to say is a blast at any Leftist. Or any policy that a Leftist might support like Social Security. Peace
She’ll say Piper, who is a similar age to the murdered little girl, is just devastated by this senseless, tragic event..you betcha.
Yeah, well, look at it this way: If, as your live blog indicated he might, yesterday, Robert Mueller goes from ‘not ruling out’ to proffering charges of terrorism against Mr. Loughner, then President Obama will have to decide whether Ms. Palin should be put on the list next to Mr. al Awlaki, since her role will have been nearly identical to Mr. al Awlaki’s in the Nidal Hasan case, which also had early signs of ‘mental instability’.
Just sayin’.
Maybe the whole edifice is so riddled with problems that death and destruction is inevitable. Still if people are going to get hoisted, it really is her petard, isn’t it?
Thanks, Jane.
Excellent post.
Don’t give her ideas! :-)
Jane wrote:
“I instinctively recoil at the suggestion that people should be held responsible for the actions of others, especially when it comes down to the influence they supposedly have on those they’ve never met. It’s the kind of Lieberman-esque thinking that brought us the culture wars, the scapegoating of video games and a decade’s worth of Ice-T demonization. As someone who did not emerge unscathed from that ignoble period in our history, I instinctively feel that the people who trade in those kinds of arguments are demagogues and hustlers.”
Gosh Jane, I think you misunderstood me. I’m not out to do a Lieberman culture war, whatever that is. I grew up with the Kennedy family, their pros and cons, and I loved them, still do.
I do believe we influence folk we’ve never met – these good forums are an example of that. I learn so much from your posts and those of everyone here, and the overwhelming desire at this moment in history is that we want to fix what is wrong, even for young people we have never met.
These conversations, charged with passion, happen every time something so wrong as this event occurs, and we ask ourselves how to respond and we do so. In the fabric of a democratic country, we are all responsible for one another, and the points being made about the availability of guns are as valid as the points I have made about the mental stability of our young people. I do think Sarah Palin bears some responsibnility for the language she and others in her party has been using, just as I think we parents bear responsibility for whatever influence we have over our children.
I guess I am puzzled by the way you began this piece. I did not mean to insult you – that is very far from my thoughts, since I admire you so much for what you are doing here. Please accept my apology for inadvertently doing that.
Personally, I appreciate most your not rushing to judgment on whether Loughner had a particular political agenda, either liberal or conservative. Too many are just positve that they know.
Jane says: “The misogyny on the left that so often fuels attacks on her will happily join in the fray…”
That’s an interesting statement – when I declare here that the racism on the left helps fuel the vile language used to describe Obama – I’m told that I’m crazy and foolish… I wonder if they’ll say the same about you…
Again, the MSM are dutifully being “balanced” in calling for “both the Left and the Right to dial it back.” And I just listened to some Republican congressman talking about his heightened “security measures” for his staff — like it’s the RIGHT that feels endangered.
Jane, you need to be on the MSNBC and CNN etc news talk shows ASAP to call “bullshit.”
I love you Jane. Are you free this evening?
Great Post Jane!
Reagan even knew, that playing with the radical right was dangerous.
The BLUE BLOODS of the GOP made a deal with the devil, in pursuit of votes.
Barbara Bush let it slip when discussin Palin, the GOP ELITE knows that there are more poor people than rich people, Barbara Bush type of Republicans don’t give a damn about Republicans like Sarah Palin, Jesse Kelly, etc. they just used them to maintain the status quo.
the elites have mastered the art of making americans vote against their self interest. the elites dont’ fight wars,
(Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Bush Jr all chicken hawks) the elites just take advantage of the poor and not that intelligent.
Barbara Bush type of republicans knows Fox News is a joke, it is not real news, it just protect them from the intelligent left.
GOP Senators says the right needs to calm down the rhetoric, he/she has to say this in secret, because he/she knows that they need radical right to vote for them.
Reagan was all over this! He knew playing with the right was Dangerous, even Bush SR. did not like the idea of playing with the radical right. (Bush Jr had no problem with making this deal with the Devil)
the radical right has always been a part of the USA political landscape, the GOP was dumb enough to move them into house of representatives, the senate, and the white house. (the left has not sent the radical left to DC)
all the crazies in the GOP has resulted in the democratic party having a lot of trojan horses that the media call Blue Dogs, Obama, Ben Nelson, etc. etc.
at the end of day Jared did not hear many voices from the left saying thou shall not kill, that politics requires debate, he saw and heard people like Sarah Palin, Jesse Kelly, we may not ever know why he pulled the trigger on Saturday, we do know, he didn’t hear many left leaning views.
if huckabee does not run and romney loses the debates because of healthcare reform, then she absolutely will get the nomination. the republicans love her insane, violent, and irresponsible rhetoric.
JEB is currently issuing the prerequisite denials of running in ’12. Says he might run in ’16.
The media is agog. Will he or won’t he? Please JEB, Save us!
Any case, I’m reminded of VP Poppy Bush and Reagan. The two hated each other. Then, when Reagan won the nomination, Poppy abandoning his principles (ahem!), oiled up and duitifully swam right up Reagan’s asshole.
It could be like that for Palin and the Heir Apparent Bush Crime Family scion, JEB.
All courtesy of the Trojan Condom Barack Obama.
She already is. It’s the “liberals” who are “obscene” and “appalling” in the situation.
Look, I’m uncomfortable with the whole “this is Sarah Palin’s fault” rhetoric. I think it’s both facile and impossible to know.
But regardless of who’s fault it is, she acted recklessly in the situation, and is incapable of responding reasonably and appropriately to questions about that. She’s not in a punk band. She didn’t make a rap video. She wants to be President of the United States. She should be able to publicly engage in a mature and responsible fashion.
Relax Jane, I never go off half cocked. Peace
Yeah, I have a feeling we’ll be in that “don’t look backwards, look forwards” thing again, which seems to be selectively applied.
But your point is good about al Awlaki’s in the Nidal Hasan case. You should write that up.
Wendy, it doesn’t matter that his political views look to have been a stew of cognitively-crippled incoherence. What matters is incitement to violence. Moreover, he didn’t simply pick some random woman at some random Tucson mall. Maybe it will not be possible to connect that, even at the tort level, to “crosshairs,” but it would not surprise me were it to be a factor.
this was akin to palin putting her fingers in her ears and saying, “didn’t hear you”, she knew what she was doing and was looking for some kind of eye winking loop hole
Saturday’s shootings won’t stop the reich from spiting out their murderous rhetoric. We won’t hear it for a couple weeks but they’ll be right back at it in no time. Hate and anger, it’s the only message they have.
Jeb has already said he’s not running in 2012 but didn’t rule out 2016. As he gets a little richer from his venture capital firm, and a little fatter, he may be too fat and happy to go through a campaign.
True. They all claim they aren’t gonna run…especially someone like Jeb, who probably wouldn’t jump in until that last minute (earlier would give too much time for opponents to point out his crappola)…and, I think that he’d only run if Babs is still alive…otherwise, I think fat and happy is what he really is and wants to be. It will be interesting to watch this all flesh out over time.
Even if this shooter was not influenced by Palin, Beck, etc. (which I don’t believe) the hysterical talk about crosshairs, targets and such has to stop. It does influence people. I remember when an abortion clinic was attacked a number of years ago and the first thing that happened was that members of Operation Rescue started calling in to talk radio saying that they would NEVER condone such a thing. Right.
Good post, Jane. I agree. My only comment is that it’s NOT just Palin, however. It’s the whole LOT of them, from Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers, the Scaifes on down to their corporate-paid mouthpieces, RushGlennBilloSean, etc.
Palin has been used by the Oligarchy to play this role. Palin is greedy huckster grifter, probably a sociopath, certainly out for herself and as much $$$$$ as she can rip off of the stupid rubes who worship at her feet. But Palin is really NOT the source of this. It goes back to Lee Atwater, KKKarl Rove, Dick Cheney, etc, working in conjunction with the rich, the powerful and the connected… the monied elite who OWN our media and dominate and control the propoganda and Orwellian-speak that we’re FED daily in our so-called “media.”
Palin merely represents the problems; at the end of the day, if it wasn’t Palin, it would be some other equally greedy, bullying, nasty, crummy, sh*tty grifter doing the same d*mn thing. Not to say that Palin, herself, doesn’t bear responsibility for her words & actions – or at least the words & actions that Rupert Murdoch & Roger Ailes PAY some minion to do/write in Palin’s name (let’s get real here) – Palin is totally responsible for what is done/said/written/twitted in her name.
However, the *problem* goes much deeper than that. But you know that. Just saying…. we are dealing with a very very big monster, indeed.
For me, the worst time politically in the two decades – worse than Obama’s recent betrayals of the Left, worse than Bush v. Gore, worse than 9/11, worse than the invasion of Iraq – was the “Palin bounce” after the Republican convention in 2008, when the McCain-Palin ticket led in the polls, and I was forced to realize that the vast majority of the American population could not recognize obvious, blatant sociopathic behavior when they saw it. It’s not as if Palin were a borderline case – the Flyers game was only one of a number of incidents, any one of which should have enabled the public to get a clue. It was made worse by the fear that John “My Fellow Prisoners” McCain would become President; his psychology is even more frightening than Palin’s, although less blatantly and for completely different reasons.
There shouldn’t be any doubt in anyone’s mind as to what Palin’s problem is. The public needs to get a clue about psychology. And psychologists need to get off their pedestal and drop the “only experts are qualified to say” nonsense. While diagnosis for the purpose of providing mental health care should no doubt be reserved to those within the profession, it is the right and responsibility of every citizen to use the best psychological concepts available to evaluate the fitness of political candidates for office. The McCain-Palin ticket should have been a wake-up call.
The shooter appears to be influenced by people pushing the Fed/gold currency spiel. Beck is one of them. I haven’t heard that from Palin, but I don’t follow her.
Exactly. It doesn’t matter if this clearly mentally ill young man was directly or indirectly influenced by incessant rightwing hate/violence speech, or not. The bullying hatred and incessant calls for violence by the right against the left has *got to stop.*
Jane,
You absolutely 100% nailed it.
I thought her pick by McCain was seen as a hail Mary pass, sort of like Mondale’s pick of Geraldine Ferraro back in ’84.
“She should be able to publicly engage in a mature and responsible fashion.”
___
Wish in one hand…
I see Sarah Palin as a clear and present danger to the nation, and I’m not gonna Boehner-esqely tear up in the event she gets necklaced by her own crosshairs.
Though, again, I think she’s gonna spin even this tragedy to her own advantage. She’ll doubtless get a lot of wingnut help.
On CSPAN this morning, right before the minute of silence, a caller said he was watching the feed from KGUN TV in Tucson on Saturday afternoon. According to the caller, the TV anchors said that Loughner’s Facebook page listed his interests as Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. He complained that this was not being reported. Don’t know if anyone has a screen shot of it somewhere on the tubes.
You make some very good points, and I agree with you. I was very open-minded when I sat down to watch Palin at the Rep. Nat’l Conv. in 2008 bc I knew nothing about her. I swear that within 30 seconds (no more, no less) I immediately knew 2 things: 1) Palin is a sociopathic grifter out only for herself, and 2) the rightwing fundies, esp, would worship at her feet and follow her into the 9th circle of hell.
I wish I had been so abjectly wrong on both of those points, but I’m not.
Rightwingers have really been blatantly manipulated and brainwashed both by the media and their churches…. it’s pretty awful to contemplate sometimes and I can feel a lot of despair when shootings like this take place because no lessons ever seem to be learned, and if anything, the bullying and violent rhetoric only seems to increase in response to the purported “push back” by the left. sigh…
Wow. That’s a good catch. If that is true…she’s gonna really be in deep doo doo.
Hate and anger are about the only thing that the rightwing has to “motivate” their base. What else have they got? There’s no jobs, our social safety net is almost gone, now they want us to give up Soc Sec & Medicare. Pitting the proles against one another is the name of the game these days.
Saw an interview with one of her “fans”. The woman said “I love Sarah. She’s wonderful.” Since then I have tried to figure out what makes her “love” Sarah. An supporter, maybe, but this gushing love I don’t get at all. What is it?
“necklessing”…not a good word.
Palin is the face of the ‘baggers and today, the ‘baggers are doubling down. Employing more violent imagery and eliminationist rhetoric in response to their imagery and rhetoric being called out:
(emphasis mine)
And:
Jane, I’m generally disposed to agree with you on most things but meeting criticism of violent rhetoric with violent rhetoric is irresponsible in the extreme.
I don’t count on Sarah Palin being in “deep doo doo.” There’s not end to the rightwing’s capability to spin things the way they want them to be spun. Palin will walk thru this sh*t and come out smelling like a rose is my prediction (not that I agree with that; just saying that’s probably how it’ll pan out).
Blue Texan’s regularly scheduled post is up: Glenn Reynolds: The Real Victims of the Arizona Mass Shooting are Conservatives
There’s still a first amendment freedom of speech in this country, let’s not forget that. I don’t agree with Palin or her targeted ad, but it’s protected. Let’s not give anyone any ideas about curtailing any more of our constitutional freedoms – we’ve already ceded too many.
What is the “gushing love” for Palin? I really don’t know, either. But coming from a very very rightwing fundie family, as soon as I witnessed Palin at the Rep Nat Con in 2008, I KNEW that there would be this exact gushing love for Palin, esp amongst fundie women. I don’t really “get it,” but I knew it would happen.
The females in my family would follow Palin into Hell if that’s what she told them to do. Makes absolutely no sense to me, but I knew Palin would have that effect. In that sense, those who chose Palin knew exactly what they were doing.
Watching her first speech sent very cold chills up and down my spine, as I felt like she was the embodiment of something very very rotten but very very powerful. Sadly, I wasn’t wrong.
Palin’s too much of a cash cow for the elites now. They’ll NEVER let her take a fall at this point. Palin’s in it for the long haul is my prediction. Follow the money….
Yeah, you’re right, an excessive rhetorical device. Even when spelled correctly. My Bad.
She is able to appear all gee, gosh, gee, gosh…then she shoots an innocent animal, that she doesn’t need to eat, in cold blood. She’s incredibly adept at seemingly being disarming…then kablambo. She’s nice looking and charismatic. All attributes that help make a dictator….and she’s soooo religious. Goody two shoes with a nuke.
lol
You’re ahead of me there; I got (1) right (and, yes, it was almost instantaneous – as if she had had the word SOCIOPATH tattooed on her forehead in bright red ink), but I blew (2) completely. I thought McCain and his advisors had made an almost unbelievable blunder, and that the Palin announcement would be the end of his campaign. To my horror, I watched for what was really only a few weeks, but seemed like an eternity, as the nation first indulged in a lovefest with the serpent it was warming in its bosom, and then, with painful slowness, caught on that she wasn’t quite what they had initially thought.
Even then, I believed that after the election the spell would be broken, and even the far Right would drop her like a hot potato. It astonishes and appals me that they still continue to take her seriously.
If Palin has the ability to make total strangers thousands of miles away do heinous things, her potential in the commercial world is stupendous. She should, by use of her rhetorical skills and physical presence, be able to influence the consumer habits of millions of uninformed, ignorant Americans. It’s pretty obvious that soon we’ll be seeing her on television selling everything from sanitary napkins to automobiles. What a gold mine!
Suing people for speech isn’t a first amendment or free speech issue:
So suing somebody for incitement to violence or liable doesn’t come under the Constitution because Congress isn’t making any laws restricting speech.
Jane, This is an excellent post. Thank you.
We may never be free of Sarah Self-Involved Palin. Already I’ve read comments on CNN and other sites that “lefties orchestrated this shooting so they could blame Sarah”. The right-wing *loves* their victimhood, and they’ll manufacture it where none exists. Already they’re overflowing with “Poor Sarah” the “Liberals are out to get her”. They are so far gone they can’t even see reason in their rearview mirrors. I don’t think they ever will. How to get around, or past them? I don’t know. Because the media seems to love them and we (lefties) are the crazy aunts and uncles in the attic to the media.
Reagan was a figurehead. James Baker was installed as Reagan’s chief of staff to make sure he didn’t wander off the reservation. He was put there by Bush to make sure Poppy and his boys Abrams, North, and Negroponte could run their little game down in Central America without anyone getting wise to them.
The “assassination” attempt on Reagan by Bush family friend, John Hinckley, was a warning to Reagan: Just read what we put in front of you and act like you’re in charge. We won’t miss next time. Bush and Mumbles Casey were running the Reagan administration from day one with help from people like Donald Gregg and Robert Gates, and old Texas pols like Lloyd Bentsen and Robert Strauss, true DINOs.
Watching the villagers yesterday and today has been nauseating. gloria borger and jessica yellen couldn’t have been more defensive in favor of the grifter. jonathan alter, chuck todd et al let alone fox.
There isn’t a single media outlet in this country that isn’t owned by a republican biased corporation.
They are all complicit in giving oxygen and light to the career of this grifter, and by extension have blood on their hands.
To render palin ‘not guilty’ is to absolve themselves.
I have consistently protested at huffpo for the glut of postings promoting her. It is to every outlet that repeats her ghost written tweets, who proliferate her ‘death panel’ proclamations. This isn’t false equivalency.
Every snarky post on a liberal blog feeds this shark.
It is time to close the door and not give her voice.
Oh good, now the deranged boy is a terrorist.
Awesome. We really need to stop this train before it gets going. The idiotic actions of a mentally unsound man child is not worth trouncing our civil liberties into the ground even more.
Unfortunately, we as a nation NEVER think things through and instead believe of the righteousness of the moment and never consider the consequences of our actions until long after the damage is done.
I ignore Sarah Palin as much as possible, but even I knew about the cross-hairs chart and anyone who visited that site would have seen it.
I don’t know if we’ll ever know if Loughner’s premeditated decision to assassinate Congresswoman Giffords, as indicated by his apparent handwritten declaration of future intent found on an envelope in a safe in his residence, was influenced by Palin’s chart identifying her as a target, but a person would almost have to be deaf, blind, and dumb not to know about that chart, and Giffords was his representative.
Notwithstanding the presumption of innocence at this point, I think it is perfectly legitimate to ask how could Jared Loughner not have known that Congresswoman Gabriele Giffords, his elected Representative in Congress, was a target on Sarah Palin’s chart? The statistical probability that he did not know that the woman he decided to assassinate was listed as a target on Sarah Palin’s website must be vanishingly small.
And freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from responsibility for your speech.
I like your intent but in order to sue someone there has to be something or a tortious nature to what they’ve done. Even a villain like Palin has the right to say things except “Go out right this minute and kill a liberal.”
As far as libel (I think that’s what you meant) laws go, she would have to intentionally and maliciously write something that she knew to be untrue about someone, other than a public person, with the intent to cause some sort of character smear about them.
Done.
As an experiment, if you are not exposed to the gun and general “hate” crowd much in every day life as some of us are: Try driving cross country through the “heartland” and on West, and listening only to AM radio. The same stations that carry sporting events all the locals listen to, and everything else, are the rest of the time near-non-stop hate talk. Punctuated by brief news blurbs that spin one or two big stories with a far right tilt. This is the toxic atmosphere that exists. I think that a bunch of the Bible stations have now been replaced by right wing “shock jocks” as Assange called them from afar – after the calls for his death. Away from the coasts, there is a different reality that people exist in.
The First Amendment is not factor in private tort proceedings.
As Jane says so well above, vegasboomer, Palin and others should not speak in such violent terms, regardless of whether her dark rhetoric incited Loughner; i.e., no one has to prove causation: the rhetoric must stop.
And we shouldn’t need these catastrophic object lessons to call them on it. Wouldn’t you love to hear that from the President?
That’s why it’s illegal to “incite to riot” and yell “Fire!” in a theatre or other public place when there’s no fire.
There were a lot of fake Facebook pages going up after the shooting. I haven’t seen anything like that in all of the screen grabs of his actual pages, so I’m not sure that’s true.
I’m no attorney, as you’ve almost certainly figured out, however, I can read and the first amendment is about Congress making laws. Period. Tort and libel aside, the first amendment is not even relevant to lawsuits over irresponsible speech. By that standard, it should be legal to shout “fire” in a crowded venue and watch the people get trampled. As for what can succeed in court, again, I’m no lawyer but I do know this: lawsuits are toxic gas to advertisers and they would bail like rats off the Titanic if some were to be filed against the right wing smear machine.
Owe you a drink SD
Understood, but the first amendment right to express political views, even in the deranged way Palin chose to do so, is protected speech. Nothing on that chart is cause for action in a libel proceeding.
Well, since I expressly say that I’m not comfortable with the suggestion that she did in the post, I guess your time might be better spent commenting on one that does.
Unless countering arguments nobody is making is your thing. In that case, have a ball.
I live in Vegas. My wife works and mostly lives in Walnut Creek CA (Bay Area). Sometimes when I drive over (about a 9 hr trip) rather than fly, I listen to AM radio, just to check. The right-wing venom is simply relentless and breathtaking. It’s not limited to the fly-over regions.
She already does.
Palin sells guns, ammo and the Sportsman’s Lifestyle. Palin sells the Tea Party and The Republican Party. She sells rugged individualist bootstraps mythology (where all who simply endeavor to only try can thrive on an equal footing) in a new world order dominated by Billionaire Corporate Profiteers.
And she gets paid millions of dollars to do it.
You hit nailheadtom’s usual M.O…..right on the nail head. :)
My point is that it doesn’t matter if Loughner did or did not know about Palin’s chart. Her actions were indefensible notwithstanding, even when judged against what other Republican party leaders were doing and saying at the time.
You’re conflating civil litigation with criminal proceedings. Nobody has suggested Palin be jailed or held criminally liable for her speech. If I understand correctly, “intent” in criminal matters has to be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt”, while in a civil trial, it has to be “more likely than not”.
Anyone seen this variation on Palin’s crosshairs web page?
http://firedoglake.com/2011/01/08/giffords-opponent-jesse-kelly-held-june-event-to-shoot-a-fully-automatic-m16-to-get-on-target-and-remove-gabrielle-giffords/#comments
Does the problem/solution language in this context remind anyone of anything? Must be my imagination. I mean they hate Hitler at least as much as Obama, right?
Thanks, Margaret. How’s it going?
Hangin’ in there, thanks. Think I’ve got January covered. Will know soon. :)
Long overdue do not feed the hate machine.
In the late 70s I was traveling to Oregon from Denver and stopped at a Denny’s or some such in Wyoming late one evening. I had a huge beard and hair to my waist. It was in the fall and rather chilly so I had on a fleece lined Levi jacket. A cowboy came over and said he and his friends were gonna kick my hippie ass when I left. There were 4 of them, half shitfaced. After I finished eating I paid my bill, went over to their booth and said, “I’m leaving now,” pulled my jacket open, revealing the butt end of the Colt .45 auto I always carried in those days. I don’t imagine things have changed much.
Those are surveyor’s marks you big silly! Of course I never saw anything like that in the year I did surveying and drafting for Barker Construction but it would be (left wing) evil of us to think otherwise
The “actual malice” standard that SCOTUS established in New York Times vs. Sullivan as the new rule to be applied in libel cases brought by public officials and public figures seeking redress for the publication of false statements about them means intentionally or recklessly false statements are actionable.
“libel” is missing the point. It’s “incitement” that might be actionable at the tort level, particularly given a “preponderance” liability judgment std and “joint and several liability.”
I’ll level the civil lawyers ferret that all out. I have no doubt they’re already out there trying to sign up victims’ families.
I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that none of them followed you out…
Well, I think for Palin, this was the last nail in the co….uhhh…the straw that broke…ummm…the 8 ball in the side pocket, for putting “paid” to her chances at the nomination. If, with the clips of her informing us of God’s vetting the lunacy of Iraq, at that Wasilla rally, and her statement in 2006 that she favored forcing women pregnant from rape or incest to carry to term, she wasn’t outside the pale, she is now. In fact, I want her to be front and center in 2012, as a reminder of just what the republican party is all about.
Glad to hear it.
It was like they were quick frozen. Prolly sobered ‘em up a bit.
Is that what you call “pissing their pants” in Florida? ;)
The misogyny that so often fuels attacks on her from the left
“So often”, really? I’m a daily consumer of the professional left and I don’t see it often, or, come to think of it, ever. What an odd little bone to throw to the people who want to create false equivalences.
Speaking of Glenn Beck! According to a segment by Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC just this morning, Glenn Beck is already complicit in helping Sarah Palin frame her patented “I’m the victim here” false premise. He talked about e-mail exchanges he had with Palin subsequent to the Tucson Massacre, and he suggested out loud on the radio that she obtain security for her family, she might be in danger.
Oh, pooooor Sarah! The “real victim” of the Massacre! Pity her, she doesn’t deserve this!! Boo-hoo.
“…we’ll be seeing her on television selling everything from sanitary napkins to automobiles.”
Well she’s extended her 15 minutes of fame from helping John McCain into an ass-kicking so well, that I think that might be just where she’s headed.
Except, after telling everyone that God is pleased with the lunacy of Iraq, I wouldn’t buy a 1973 Renault from her.
Bingo! Just what I was going to say.
If the elites wanted her to do it, Palin could SELL just about anything, including feminine hygene products. I’ve been stating a lot today today that Palin is the ultimate ca$h cow for the elites. Palin’s going nowhere; she makes the elites rich by fleecing the rubes for them.
You’ll see loads of Palin victimization bc it makes great copy & great money from the rubes.
Hasn’t she done this already with two shitty books?
Why are my comments tagged… Awaiting moderator approval? It seems discriminatory and demeaning.
You need to send me an email explaining this action or have it stopped. At least explain why this is!
Please.
But of course…. just what I would’ve expected. And the Beckerheads will be wringing their hands and crying for Palin (not for Giffords, that’s for sure). Just another way to gin up the base & sell more of Beckerhead’s fake Goldline junk.
“…the misogyny that so often fuels attacks on her from the left.”
I am no longer a fan of Hillary Clinton, but after the attacks on her when she was first lady, and afterwards, for any conservative to say that, requires two things: a brain the size of a pea, and balls the size of King Kong’s.
I know and I agree, but I was responding to Isis’s remark about Susaniniowa’s comment @47, in which she said,
“On CSPAN this morning, right before the minute of silence, a caller said he was watching the feed from KGUN TV in Tucson on Saturday afternoon. According to the caller, the TV anchors said that Loughner’s Facebook page listed his interests as Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. He complained that this was not being reported. Don’t know if anyone has a screen shot of it somewhere on the tubes.”
Therefore, there may be a connection to Palin’s chart and that, as Isis said, would be a “Great Catch.”
Regardless if that’s true, however, you’re right. Sarah Palin’s political career should be over.
I’m sure they wanted those areas surveyed. Makes perfect sense. Like Sarah Palin’s tweets.
I don’t believe that Palin didn’t mean what she wrote. Palin is a bully and intimidation is a large item in her bag of tricks. As for the reverse victimization spew, it’s a tactic, nothing more. For people like Palin and Beck, et al, it’s Vince Lombardy’s maxim(probably heard from Henry Russell Sanders at UCLA): “Winning isn’t the everything. It’s the only thing.” Winning makes you right. It’s what makes shallow religiosity so dangerous, the belief that God ordains all and we can’t do wrong if we believe, God won’t allow it. I wish. Palin always puts me in mind of Milton’s Satan, “Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.” Attractive and charismatic but lethally egocentric and wrongheaded, wrong hearted, enormously, heedlessly destructive. Entirely bent on her own ends and whatever it takes to get there. The epitome of the Cult of Me, Myself, and I.
Jane,
Just a thought (and I may put together a diary in more detail on this), but I’m guessing the Republican backroom powerbroker boys and girls are quite pleased to see Sarah Palin take the fall for this in the MSM.
Yes, they love them some hotheads and firebrands for stirring up the base, but dagnabbit, can’t have one of those out-of-control useful idiots sitting at the seat of power.
Or as Genghis Khan was once thought to have remarked (I’m making this up *g*), “fire and brimstone is fookin’ great, but not if they burn down the place before we get to pillage and loot.”
David Brock of Media Matters, from October 28:
I almost never write about Palin because the attacks on her from the left are frequently fueled by misogyny, even when they are well-deserved on the basis of the underlying facts. It always makes me uncomfortable to take part in it.
So, no. It wasn’t thrown in as a bone. That is really how I feel, and I had a section in the post about that, but it seemed to digressive so I took it out. But the same contingent that took glee in tearing Hillary Clinton apart moved on to Sarah Palin. I didn’t support Clinton either, but found the sexism fueling the attacks on her to be unnerving as well. Which is still enough to earn me the tag “Hillary shill” in their eyes, at which point I rest my case.
Possible, I’ll check it out. There was a lot of misinformation flying around at that time (up to and including NPR, which reported Giffords was dead…which I personally put up as a post). So it’s hard to say.
Jane
Everything you say about Palin is true. My quarrel is with what might be your conclusion. IMHO she has not shot her load. Comparisons with the late A. Hitler are uncomfortably apt. He was as nutty, but with things bleak a plurality of Germans thought he was the answer. If the economy is worse in 2012, Palin will be a force to be reckoned with. No one will do anything about it except talk although by that time, talk such as happens here on FDL may be restricted.
Some people are Natural Born Killers, that is killing and violence come easy to them. Big advantage over the rest of us.
Unfortunately, it is precisely Palin’s willingness to be outrageously beyond even the “Republican Pale”, coupled with her self-evident “victimhood”, especially in circumstances such as these past few days, where her most ardent supports have quickly perceived that she, poor Sarah, would be taken to task … that make her appealling, for she is seen, evermore, to be just as they perceive themselves to be, daring victims of the “liberal” establishment.
In a reasonable society, Palin would never, could never, have achieved the “success” or notoriety which clearly, and most unfortunately for the rest of us, is hers, in an unreasonable and unreasoning society, such a one as Palin is seen as the “true measure” of courage and pluck, in fact she becomes a symbol of all that her supporters yearn for, for themselves.
Even in her “victimhood”, Palin is perceived as strong and courageous, and NEVER as destructive or responsoble for anything which might upset her followers.
The social psychology of our nation is in tatters and demagogues such as Palin are likely, unless the left may develop compelling narratives of a better, more sane, and more decent world, to hold sway and capture the future which follows “looking forwards” …
DW
I noticed that as well. I quit blogging almost altogether in the run up to the election. It was quite disgusting.
If the facts are accurate, that makes it harder to be sure that misogyny is really the cause; invention of facts is the most common way that prejudices give themselves away. Are you sure it isn’t just loathing for sociopaths that’s usually involved? Or for people from the backwoods? I do seem to recall some attacks on Palin that sounded misogynistic, but “frequently” strikes me as an exaggeration.
I wish you had left that section in, and I would like to see it. Seriously. If attacks on Palin are “frequently fueled by misogyny”, I’m missing something important.
Jane; sorry to have misread that. I thought it was part of the conservative statment, about the left attacking her because of misogynism.
I apologize for mis-reading it.
Having said that, I feel that, while there may BE some of that motivating progressive criticism of her, it’s so little compared with the genuine anger at her neanderthal politics, that’s it’s hardly worth mentioning.
But again, sorry to have misunderstood the piece. Thanks.
Well, I was sure going after Hillary, but it had nothing to do with “misogynism”. I was appalled at her oozing to the right, and at her dog-whistle racism.
“She acts like a sneaky teenager”
Perfect description! She also obviously has the maturity level of a teenager.
I’ll guess it was a wise editorial decision to remove the digression.
I’m a typical reader of the best known left and center-left blogs and I don’t know what you’re talking about with this misogyny. You have to be talking about commenters, because I’ve never seen any blogger make a sexist comment about her. And if it’s commenters, then that’s a casual imputation to make about “the left” generally. Every writer in blogs I read mocks her for being stupid, not a slut, a vicious baboon, not a vamp or bimbo. I don’t get the weird protectiveness of her sex.
I’ve heard accusations of misogyny leveled at those who opposed and disparaged Hillary Clinton, but I don’t recall a single instance of it. Then again, I didn’t follow the 2008 campaign very carefully until shortly before the conventions, so I might have missed it. (And it wasn’t Obama that got me excited about politics – it was the specter of John McCain blowing up the world.) Could you fill me in on exactly what you’re talking about?
Incidentally, I initially supported Hillary Clinton over Obama, simply because I thought she was more likely to be able to win, although I’ve never liked either of the Clintons. (Because I’m a registered Green, I didn’t have the chance to express my support at the polls; had I been a Democrat, I would probably have voted for Hillary in the primary.)
Liz Cheney – you just made my blood run cold
I wasn’t accusing anybody of anything. BTW, I was castigated quite severely and called everything from a PUMA to a closet Republican, (despite having voted for Obama in the primary), for having the temerity to say that Obama supporters shouldn’t be badmouthing Clinton supporters but should be welcoming of them. Yeah, it was ugly on our side, very ugly.
If I really wanted to be a bitch about it, I might ask, “How’s that great progressive savior Obama working out for you?”
I agree about some of the comments about Palin, pure woman hating. The attacks on Hillary, whom I supported during the primaries, were dumbfounding. Especially the irrational and completely unsupported vitriol that poured out of women. I suggested to a woman at work that some high profile women were envious and afraid that Hillary’s ascension would diminish their own achievements, make them seem less by comparison. I couldn’t get over how crazy and spiteful it all seemed. Not a word in any of it to explain why they so disliked Hillary, just acid spilling over the pages. Given that there was plenty to criticize, and I did as I supported her, I still can’t get over how irrational and entirely unsubstantiated it was.
I’m not going to go back and dig up citation. I haven’t made any specific accusations and I’m not going to. Do your own research.
I hope this comment doesn’t catalyze a dismal reliving of the 2008 primary and the evanascent and, in retrospect, embarrassing passions it stimulated in people here (like me).
Sal Russo, the leader of the Tea Party Express, and others have made statements about Jared Loughner based on false Facebook profiles created immediately after the shootings. That is why I wouldn’t put any credence at this point on supposed entries by Loughner from his “facebook profile” unless it comes from credible sources (which I’m sure you don’t Margaret but am mentioning this in case others weren’t aware yet).
Breitbart blogger cites made-up Facebook profile of Loughner as Obama supporter
Not from me, it won’t. I stopped blogging then because it got so ugly. I have no desire to relive it.
Okay, my comment was about the ‘baggers answering criticism for irresponsible rhetoric with more irresponsible rhetoric. I couldn’t care less about Loughner’s facebook entries and in fact, I’ve been saying since the events took place that his state of mind and politics are irrelevant to the discussion of irresponsible hate speech coming from the right.
I was being tongue in cheek. It wasn’t the “ugliness” that was embarrassing. It was the lilliputian quality of it. If only Hillary Clinton had been nominated! She would have saved us from…all the Clinton administration retreads.
I looked at Clinton vs Obama as DLC vs DLC on steroids.
misogynism
You might want to correct this Palinesque malicious priapism, er, I meant malapropism!
If this kind of response is typical of what was said, maybe it is best to let the 2008 Obama-Clinton primary campaign rest in peace after all.
Perfectly, perfectly, perfectly put, particularly the comparison to teenage qualities. Behavioral researchers tell us that if women have not matured emotionally beyond adolescence by the time they are 25, they are unlikely ever to do so (for men, it’s age 30). Sarah is now more than 20 years past her 25th birthday. Clearly, the behaviorists know what they’re talking about.
Thank you, Jane.
How does one turn off the video adds that run on their own? MODS???
An essay in the anthology Unmasking the Psychopath (unfortunately, I no longer have access to it, so I can’t provide an exact quotation) characterizes the psychology of sociopaths as that of “latency-age” children (essentially, elementary school). Jane’s “sneaky teenager” is close to the image they were depicting, although they picked a slightly earlier age range.
Way to go Jane. You would make a far better presidential candidate. I love it when you repeat what I just told my husband. obama and the dems will not like this. Maybe I will no longer have people saying, “what are you going to do vote for Sarah Palin?” It will be interesting to see who they replace her with.
I blame Wonkette who kissed her ass before anyone outside of Alaska heard of her, who said she’s hot shit even for being a Republican. It’s probably how McCain’s people learned about her and her unprecedented local popularity.
If you are gong to quote Jane, copy and paste works quite well.
As a leftie, I am concerned that many people here overplayed this from shortly after the shooting. Thankfully, Jane makes it clear that it is too early to conclude that the violent right was a significant influence over Jared’s decision to murder those people.
Symbols have consequences, of course, but symbols from Sarah Palin may have had nothing to do with this shooting. It should not be used as an opportunity to bash the right unless it is clear that Jared was influenced by the right.
In any event, Sarah Palin usually attacks the left based upon scripted talking points which rarely have anything to do with reality. Cutting the defense budget, for example, is always wrong if it comes from Obama as he is trying to weaken America.
Melisssa McEwan did a whole “Sarah Palin Sexism Watch.” #1 was Stephanie Miler calling her a bimbo:
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/08/sarah-palin-sexism-watch-1.html
You might want to check out a few of them. It’s a subject that has been written about by many notable people, and I’m confident that I’m not recklessly throwing out unfounded accusations.
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/09/sarah-palin-sexism-watch-11.html
I don’t want to relitigate the primary wars, or get into a long discussion of the misogyny that fuels a lot of Palin-analysis, because it’s unpleasant to defend someone from charges of sexism who doesn’t want to pay for rape kits. And, I’m not a research assistant. There’s plenty out there on the subject already. But the presumption that it’s a “bone” is unfair and unfounded. That is how I genuinely feel, whether you agree or not.
Yeah, hopefully Palin’s toast. She takes no responsibility for anything ever. She is kinda a mirror into America in much the same way I use to argue that Bush was a mirror of America-simple minded, anti-intellectual, and just a down home guy. In other words part simpleton, and part myth. Nobody ever looks in a mirror in this country. We are responsible in some way for these being the types of individuals that we find valid to lead us.
I used to say Bush wasn’t fit to be dogcatcher, and Palin fits that bill as well. Worthless, not very bright characters-but damn mean and uncaring about the deaths of thousands, which I guess is the wild west mythos of America that we love.
Palin doesn’t care. The right wing doesn’t care. These people used and continue to use the fear and grief of America over 9/11 to foster pointless wars where hundreds of thousands of people die.
Why is this any different? Oh yes, only when it might be their own hide that gets hit. Well, Palin isn’t even smart enough to realize that she advocating violence on politicians could come back to bite her own ass.
And yes, I will say it with much bitterness-it does seem to always be the lefties that die. Always,Reagan lived to 93 and John Lennon 40,that summed up life for me at a very tender age. If you are for peace, you die, for war you live. God Bless America!
“…shouldn’t be bad-mouthing Clinton supporters…”
Depends on when you’re talking about. After it was evident that he was going to be our nominee, it made sense to try to kiss and make up. Before that, when she was hanging on to nothing, and a lot of her supporters were ranting about what they might, or might not, do at the convention, my 2c, they deserved the bad-mouthing, and they certainly gave as good as they got.
As for how he’s working out now, he’s working out very badly, but that doesn’t change the fact that the choices we had were between an out-and-out clone of George Bush; and in the primaries, a “liberal” who voted for Bush’s war and who then refused to eat that vote until she saw it helping ruin her chance at the nomination, and who spent a good deal of time and political capital schmoozing with the right, and who unhesitatingly played the race card in some of her campaign tactics.
BTW, regarding that “how’s that working out?”, when he picked Clinton for SecState, for me, it was the first warning bell that he was going to lard his administration with Clinton retreads and, as it turned out, that he was going to pursue the “centrist” policies which have dragged us right back into the political swamp.
Anything else?
There is huffpo and daily beast promoting her daily. huffpo is the most egregious, often having 5 postings in the center column.. Charles blow called them on it around christmas and they lightened up for around a week then they picked it up again. They often have more palin related posts than any msm or right wing blogs. They breathlessly parrot her ghost written tweets like they are news. Let this tree fall silently in the woods.
If she is out of sight she will eventually be out of mind.
“Jane made it clear that it was too early to conclude…”
She did, and we know now, that it was the right thing to do. Period. Exclamation point.
I might disagree slightly with your assessment on the common intelligence of the nation’s populace. What better way to insure the republican Obama a win than to put him up against that duo in an elephant costume? I’ll leave it to you to decide who wore the head and who wore the tail.
I just had a depressing conversation with a neighbor about that very subject. When you need to believe, it’s amazing how much you can overlook and excuse. And I can’t really blame him for his apologist denials because I did the same with Bill Clinton. Past tense did.
This guy’s one of the worst inflamers in politics
He’s been behind some of the worst smear campaigns of the last 10 years at least. He’s protecting Palin and rest of the manichean troglodytes because they’re his money ticket. And, he has no sense of decency or morals whatsoever
I wouldn’t doubt that it was his idea to use the crosshairs on her website
Just search his name
There have been a number of new type (unseen before names) floating around the past couple of days spouting that nonsense – It’s because Mein Kampf was National Socialism doncha know so that makes it a librul book
I wouldn’t know, being a media recluse. Firedoglake is my filter, rock & redeemer.
Just yell Allah Akbar before you shoot. Then the left will call it an isolated incident. Blaming Palin is lame. The dems have used crosshairs before. Political speak is just that. Political. Has been since the founding. Deal with it.
Sure, point taken. It’s just jarring to read this non-sequitur in defense of Palin, who is a nearly indefensible character.
There were several people who hyped Palin early. One was a college student who was obviously in love and another the redoubtable(in both senses of the word) William Kristol, who met Palin on a trip to Alaska and fell head over heels. I always wondered what Bill Kristol’s wife thought: school boy crush? Palin, I gather, has charisma to burn and a comically rapturous effect on some males. Stone blind DAZZLED. We’re all susceptible to some particular type of appeal but Palin’s is so overtly sexual, it’s remarkable.
America’s Blue Angel?
Wouldn’t it be great if Tina Fey becomes the White House Press Secretary now?
Thanks for the links. Now I can at least see what you’re talking about.
No one was under any impression that you were. I came to Firedoglake when I began to be disillusioned with Obama, specifically because I knew you were the preeminent critic of Obama from the Left. But where I come from, even the most eminent scholars accept responsibility for backing up controversial statements that they make, if only by referencing places where others have done so. Charges that certain criticisms are motivated by misogyny go beyond the basic facts, and someone who doesn’t agree with you cannot reasonably be expected to pick out the facts you believe to support your case from all the others out there – or to do their own research to support a point they don’t see any plausibility to in the first place. Responding with “do your own research” doesn’t help your credibility, or that of Firedoglake as a whole.
Having followed your links and seen what you have in mind, another source of misinterpretation becomes apparent. A great deal of what you and others are interpreting as sexism may in fact be criticism of Palin for using her sexuality for political appeal, and of male conservatives for responding to it, and of female conservatives for wanting to emulate her. In other words, it need not be the critics who are sexist, but Palin and her fans. Pointing out Palin’s sexist manipulation does not make us sexists. What are we supposed to think when she winks at us from the podium during a debate, or when Rich “Starbursts” Lowry at National Review all but salivates in response?
So I cannot agree at all with Melissa McEwan’s statement (at the link you provide) that “there’s no goddamned reason to criticize [Palin] for anything but her policies.” Blatant sexist manipulation on the part of Palin herself – and response to it on the part of her followers – is absolutely relevant to the political discourse. And I think that much, at least, of the apparent sexism in the Gary Kamiya article held up as Exhibit A of sexist criticism of Palin falls into the same category.
I take this as trollery, but I actually raises a point worth addressing. I think what you mean with “the left will call it an isolated incident” is that in the wake of something like the Fort Hood incident, or an attempted terrorist attack, civil libertarians will preemptively defend the civil liberties of an unpopular minority in the face of calls for the encroachment on the rights of that minority, not to mention the civil liberties of the majority not to be surveilled and harrassed.
I’ll take it that you, on the right, in the wake of these political murders, are defending the 2nd amendment rights of kooks who ingest right-wing brainwashing and violent rhetoric like using “second amendment remedies” or “watering the tree of liberty with blood”. That’s your right, I guess, and a neat illustration of the differences between right and left these days.
That all said, not everyone on “the left” sees violence by Muslims as a priori “isolated incidents”. Some of us (as well as a few on the right, like Ron Paul or Patrick Buchanan) see such acts as the acts of individuals who, while maybe mentally unstable or religion-obsessed, would otherwise be law-abiding citizens if not for the incitement caused by pointless, immoral wars and occupations agains Muslim countries.
Well, Marlene Dietrich strikes me as having had more depth, of character and intellect. I know about her sexual adventures and her addictions, nonetheless, she always seemed to have substance. Maybe Marlene just fooled people on that, but that is my impression.
Palin played the sex card so consistently and conspicuously it was astonishing that so few commentators noted it. Kathleen Parker finally did in a radio call-in exchange:
It seems unlikely that no one else among the commentariat noticed Palin’s intensely sexual projection, but no one else that I’ve read said or wrote anything about it.
Citing the vapid Parker doesn’t do your argument any favors. Where was this consistent playing of the sex card? I must have missed that along with the misogyny.
You have to remember that Washington pundit dimwits have a lower bar for what passes as “sexy”.
Oh, they were all over it. Andrew Sullivan at the Atlantic:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/palins-superpow.html
Rachel Weiner at the Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/inris-rich-lowry-palin-se_n_131735.html
Jim Newell at Wonkette:
http://wonkette.com/403261/conservative-pundit-describes-boner-he-got-watching-palin
Just Google “palin starbursts” for more.
Thanx, but no thanx. I can only do so much reading in one day and none of those sources are on my to-do list. I’ll take your word for it. Not much commentary, really, when you consider how long the campaign lasted and how unremitting Palin was, and is.
You did miss it, but given that you did, it’s not worth going back at this point.
I wasn’t especially recommending them as edifying reading – just documenting my assertion that there was a lot of stuff out there on this topic.
Believe me, those just scratch the surface – they were intended as illustrative, not as a complete list, and were found on the fly with the first Google search I tried, on a very narrow subtopic (the winking/”Starbursts” incident). There’s a lot more out there. Although I don’t especially recommend it as a high priority except for those truly in doubt of the truth of my assertions that Palin was a sexual manipulator, and that this fact was widely recognized by commentators.
Andrew Sullivan is probably even less of an expert on female sexual projection than Kathleen Parker.
There’s maybe a broader and more precise taxonomy regarding anti-Palinists, apart from party politics: anti-feminism, sexism, misogyny, and gynephobia.
But there was plenty of balance, or wasn’t Barry a major sex object?
No doubt you’re right about both Andrew Sullivan and Kathleen Parker. But I cited other sources as well – and Palin’s manipulations (including, but not limited to, winking into the camera from the debate podium) were sufficiently blatant that little expertise in interpretation was required. If you need a more expert source, follow the Rich Lowry link above :-)
I’d like to think I didn’t see the voluminous commentary because I don’t read the kind of stuff wherein prurience is nearly always the appeal. But actually, I do read about sex, just not campaign fodder sex. And writers who specialize in titillation just don’t interest me. My sex interests me, other people’s not so much. My point was that Palin played the sex card early and often and got away with it. Commentary or no. Kathleen Parker’s comments came well after the campaign was over.
Here’s something to chew on, tho: would a man who made such an explicit appeal have been taken seriously as a presidential candidate? I’m guessing not.
He was, and there was some commentary on that topic in the press – but I’m not aware of any evidence that Obama ever sought sexual attention from the general public, or tried to use it for political advantage, as Palin so blatantly did.
Palin has more political lives than Richard Nixon, Newt Gingrich, and Rasputin combined. Her career is far from over.
Definitely wrong to be an attractive, healthy lady in the political environment. The doughy Hillary or ghastly Madeline Albright just have to be deeper thinkers.
Yeah, to read the women writers I finally gave up on, absolutely. McDreamy they called him. Honestly, it was embarrassing. Jr high school swooning.
I would think not – but then again, I didn’t think anyone would take Palin seriously either, and they did, and still do.
Nice reference that, Rasputin. Ever read about him? Horrifying. I don’t think Palin has that kind of imagination, for want of a better word.
No, that’s not what anyone in this discussion means, if I take your comment correctly. No one objects to Palin’s looks, per se.
She was in a beauty pageant fercryinoutloud. She aspired to become a teevee personality. She was a superior athlete. Don’t you suppose she would have had to completely alter her character to avoid what you’re calling ‘blatant’ sexual projection? Besides, it didn’t come across on the radio — if you only listened it was fingernails screeching on the chalkboard. Furthermore, a lot of women voted for Nixon over Kennedy. Maybe it was his sweaty upper lip.
Sarah is only masquerading as a *viable* politician – these days she’s currently un-electable – she needs game-changing events to supervene in her favor.
Which is precisely why she’s dangerous – her brand *needs* a Revolution for her to eventually triumph. She has to be edgy, controversial and take risks *all the time* in order to keep her name in the papers from day to day.
Hitler was a rabble-rousing, backwoods, bohemian populist who was regularly ridiculed as uncouth by most reasonable, sensible Germans – that is until the banking system collapsed, and along with it faith in the Wiemar government.
Unfortunately for all of us, Palin’s only hope for success is for instability and catastrophe to similarly propel her down the road of destiny. For that reason, imvho, we should expect her to keep lurking around all acts of *nationalist* extremism.
Did you happen to listen to any women who saw Clinton in person during the 1992 campaign?
I don’t especially care for her voice either, but I watched the vice-presidential debate live (as well as replays of those winks), and no, this is not just an ex-beauty-queen and TV commentator doing what she’s used to doing. The winking was over the top and around the bend.
I forgot Janet Napolitano, who put Arizona on the path to fiscal catastrophe before QUITTING as the governor of the Copper State. She projects sexuality that fogs up the room.
Are you serious? No, I thought not.
I do remember hearing quite a bit about female reactions to Bill Clinton, but, again, it’s not just a matter of how people react, but of whether the candidate sought and tried to use such reactions for public political purposes.
Then again, I never especially liked or trusted Bill Clinton either, and I never voted for him, although I did support him against the Republican impeachment monstrosity. In 1992 I voted for a minor-party left-wing protest candidate whose name I can’t even remember, and in 1996 I voted for Ralph Nader. Bill Clinton wasn’t anywhere near as blatant or obvious as Sarah Palin, but I got a creepy vibe from him as well. And from Hillary, even though I supported her – lukewarmly – early in 2008 because at the time I thought Obama couldn’t win and the Republicans were all awful.
I heard Palin at the Govs’ whachamacallit convention shortly after the 2008 election. Gov Goodhair intro’d. God, he is hilariously bad. Gov Duh. After his insipidity, a little girl started talking. I couldn’t believe it. That’s when I realized that Palin’s appeal is completely, entirely visual. There is no audio appeal. At all. The woman is all visual. What a revelation. If you can’t see her, no sex appeal whatsoever. The discontinuity between appearance and voice is unnerving, like there’s two different people in the same space. I wonder which is the real Palin?
The scenario was a little different though with Palin. Palin was necessary in order to energize the Republican base. Which ought to tell you a whole lot about the Republican base. McCain wasn’t conservative enough for them. Palin was who got them excited. Enough said.
Palin, like Coulter and Beck, is a performance artist. Instead of making a modest, upper middle income salary as a governor, with all the work it takes to do that successfully, she is now “a commentator”, meaning she can perform whenever and wherever she and her agent agree. She is now independently wealthy, which makes her immune to the limitations and conflicts that affect 98% of Americans.
Ms. Palin is now a multimillionaire with a national following, thanks to billionaire patrons who find her public persona useful. To the extent they continue do so, as was true of the limited personality of George Bush, she remains a viable potential politician, ready to do whatever her patrons ask, though mostly as a rabbit and a spoiler. She could hold onto political office only so long as she could insulate herself from credible evaluations of her performance and delegate the real work to her staff. That leaves open to her most of the political jobs in DC.
This is the most insightful article I’ve read yet about the Tuscon massacre. Just spot on.
Sarah Palin will never be charged as an accomplice to the tragedy, but she’s being tried, right now, in the public arena. And it’s killing her. You know, she wants back in. Do overs.
Back in 2008, the cheap political stunt known as Sarah Palin offered millions of sentient life forms (worldwide) the occasion to briefly meditate on the subject of America’s deserved reputation as a political lunatic asylum. For my part, this rueful rumination on the ridiculous led to a few verse stanzas about nothing leading to nowhere, or:
A Bridge to Erehwon
She first overtly hunted
Some money for a bridge
Then switched and said she wanted,
For Eskimos, a Fridge.
But still she kept the money
And spent it anyhow
While claiming that her honey
Was — had you heard? — a POW.
Her blatant obfuscation
Has trampled over truth
In lying to the nation
From Dallas to Duluth.
If you want “change” then copy
The man who offered hope,
Then grow some Afghan Poppy
To hook the rubes on dope.
It really doesn’t matter
What words the White Girl speaks.
She’s madder than a hatter
But thrills the Christian freaks.
America’s gone batty:
A Bedlam for the boobs
Who thrive on rumor catty
Seen on their TV tubes.
The folks just want to get on
With life that has no mind.
They thus will always bet on
The bland who lead the blind.
The Valley Girl now utters
Her mall refrain: “fer shure!”
Frank Zappa’s song still mutters
The truth: “There is no cure.”
She’s got some “sex” to offer
If you don’t look too close.
But if you buy the proffer,
She’ll leave you with a dose.
Republican perversion
From sex suppressed too long
Results in sick subversion
And government gone wrong.
And so to vie for dumb votes
The White Girl gets it on:
Utopia for zygotes!
Spelled backwards: Erehwon.
Michael Murry, “The Misfortune Teller,” Copyright 2008
That anyone would seriously contemplate this crude, incompetent clown for national (or even local) office speaks volumes for quickly cancelled TV situational comedies but hardly a word worth hearing otherwise.
Jane, i know FDL doesn’t have control over which ads “pop up” on the site, but right now, there’s one that you should be able to banish:
Right above a picture of Congresswoman Giffords, is an ad for — and picture of — a “4-16-50 IR Mil-Dot sniper scope.”
This just makes me sick.
It won’t save us from anything until we get to the bottom of the ugly truths it is teaching us about human nature. The psychology of her followers is an even darker mystery than Palin’s own.
Did there really need to be any other reason than she is a complete idiot for her not to be qualified for political office?
She’s already on the job, imo. All she has to do is perform acts on camera using whatever the object of the shill is, and her legions will line up to buy it. It’s the new, stripped-down promotional model with a shift in who the various principals and agents —and intermediaries I suppose— are.
We’re aware of the problem these ads are presenting… so many ads are shown in context of the content, so as we discuss guns, gun ads show up. We’re working with our ad team to figure out how to stop this whole category of ad from showing up. I hope to stop it totally tonight. Thanks for your patience and understanding.
This is going to be blood on Sarah’s hands, pun intended.
So Jane Hamsher is going to take responsibility if one of her readers uses the sniper scope she is advertising on an assault rifle to kill people? She could just stop showing the ads on her page… but that would cost her money. Oh wait, that is what she is saying Sarah Palin is irresponsible and reckless for doing…
You should check in with Jon Stewart and drop the self-righteous hypocrisy.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-january-10-2011/arizona-shootings-reaction