I killed him. Palin told me so.
because they’re sick and cruel and wont condemn anything that in any way benefits them. sarah palin was talking about the price of gold four hours after it happened, then hours later decided to basically say “WELP THAT SUCKS” on facebook and go on with her life.
Ok…You go off on people for ‘not arguing with facts, but with baseless accusations’ and then post a link to Free Republic? I’m sensing a bit of dissonance here.
We’ve established that’s hardly a crosshair, but lets say it is. Cross hairs are generic symbols for a targeted area. Both sides use them, corporate execs use them, environmentalists use them, everyone uses them. Thats what they are for. It is not instigating violence.
Now as to the issue of wording, I will only say this. Both sides use similarly harsh language. To conservatives, liberals want to make this country into a totalitarian state where people have no rights and the government controls everything. Liberals claim that conservatives want to turn this place into a corporate controlled oligarchy where no one has any rights and must bow to their corporate over lords. Neither of these view points are correct, and each make it seem like the group is fighting for the American way. As far as I’m concerned, Republicans and Democrats are on equal footing in that arena. Both sides use language that could destabilize people (you are far to far to the left to probably actually see this. I won’t argue this point too far because of that. Perspectives simply cannot be bridged.)
So what do you do about this? Limit speech that could inflame violence? Great way to limit free speech massively. Arrest people whose speech incites violence? Again, great way to limit free speech, and a person cannot be held accountable for idiots. The simple reality is we have to accept crazy people exist, and deal with them as they appear.
EDIT: Also, I linked to a picture. Its factual. They aren’t crosshairs. Plus I got it from the link you provided.
yeah that would be valid if she wasnt saying DONT RETREAT RELOAD, and if she didnt say all this shit about OH WE STILL HAVE THE SECOND AMENDMENT
they are absolutely crosshairs, and she was absolutely intending for them to be taken as threats. i just dont think she thought anyone would actually do anything.
and dont bring up all this free speech bullshit, that has nothing to do with this argument.
Free speech has everything to do with this argument. You are making baseless accusations trying to get a political figure to go away and cease to express her opinions, or, in other words, trying to suppress free speech you happen to not agree with. While I will not say that I support her viewpoint, she has the right to express it.
Honestly, provide some actual evidence that she wished to kill people, then we’ll talk. Until then, you’re proving my point.
oh my god no it has nothing to fucking do with this argument because no one is trying to censor anyone, we’re saying she is partially responsible for what she said
you’re bringing up irrelevant shit to try to make yourself look smarter
mother of fuck you’re an idiot
if all her “lol everyone wave guns around nra 4 evz” and a map with crosshairs isnt enough for you then maybe you should move to alaska because you seem like exactly the kind of person shes trying to attract
So what you’re saying is you are holdy her partially responsible for a man’s death but saying that’s okay and she can continue to say what she’s saying? Thats a concerning viewpoint.
In any case, supporting gun rights and labeling people as people who she considers harmful to America is hardly a request for people to go kill others.
yep
saying “i think you should kill x” is an opinion and if you say it whatever you’re a bit of a fuckin psycho but no harm done
but if it actually gets done then you need to be punished. not for your opinion, but for the fact that you got someone killed.
Only she never said “I think you should kill x”. She said “I think you should remove x from office”. What you want is that if someone does something an idiot could misinterpret as a request to kill someone they should be arrested, which is a great way of a group controlling free speech.
The simple reality of this all is that in no way shape or form did she call for his death. She noted him as a target in the way of a republican policies and as such a target for removal from Washington. You are making baseless accusations and are the exact reason this is a free speech issue.
how she intended her cute little crosshairs and “jokes” to go over doesn’t matter when someone actually goes through with it. she worded her statements in a bad way, and that wording could have possibly got multiple people killed. it needs to at least be looked into.
Someonerandm: You need to understand that she doesn’t HAVE to explicitly order something. This is an OVERARCHING sentiment about “the left”. You can’t point to a single sentence, a single speech or a single action, because it’s not the sentence, speech or action, but the context it is in.
They are trying to stigmatize the entire political worldview and calling it “damaging” and “terroristic” and the “downfall of America”. Self-described “patriots” would see this and turn people like myself into “the enemy”. And here is where “the enemies” are…crosshairs.
Do you understand?
D’oh…Ignore me then. :fffuuu:
Honestly though? No, I don’t think Palin intended this to happen. However, the fact that she goes back and pulls any relevant images or comments that she made, and that she immediately shifts into ‘Cover My Ass’ mode just makes her look even more sleazy than usual. The smart thing to do would be to keep those up there and say something along the lines of “perhaps my previous words were inappropriate.” Boom. Over and done with. With the state of the media, it might get one or two days of discussion by the various talking heads, and then its forgotten with her career still intact. By trying to obfuscate the issue she’s just making herself look responsible for what happened, be that accusation justified or not.
However, can any of us really say that this wouldn’t have happened if the current state of political discourse in the US weren’t so goddamned bilous? I think, personally, that there’s a very good chance that the constant demonization of political opponents, especially by the Right Wing in this country is partially responsible.
I can see it, but at the same time I consider it exaggerated by the left trying to paint a broad picture or conservatives as violent gun nuts. I live in Texas, which is hardly liberal, and know of no one who would consider liberals the “enemy”, and a lot of these people are hardcore gun nuts who go out hunting every other weekend. An isolated incident like this is hardly proof positive of this notion.
In any case, have we got any info on the attacker? I can’t seem to find any.
Finally, thank you for using proper grammar and spelling. It makes this so much easier.
using proper grammar and spelling doesnt make your arguments/fallacies any more valid, jsyk
No. No one said that. Now stop.
If it were an isolated incident, you might have a point, but there have been many incidents like this as well as the skyrocketing gun-purchasing rate since Obama was elected.
And you cannot, with a straight face, say that, in some sections of the population, that “liberals” aren’t considered the “enemy of America”. Look at the picture I posted. I can cite you thousands of instances where this is the case.
Is it representative of conservatism or the right? No. But the right’s tacit acceptance of these nutbags is worrying.
the right does/advocates something worrying to benefit themselves without worrying about the rest of the population. in other news, water is still wet. back to you, janet.
I’m really only fighting the general view of conservatives a gun nuts who consider liberals the enemy, of which I know multiple. Especially on this forum. Second, cite to me those other incidents in which violent action has been taken. Third, the rights hardly accepts these people. They consider people who run around saying we should kill politicians just like anyone else: as insane.
I know they think they’re insane, but you NEVER hear them attacking these people. Ever.
How about that guy that flew his plane into the IRS building?
Also, NO ONE is saying that “conservatives are gun nuts who consider liberals the enemy”. No one. At all. So stop suggesting that.
The guy who crashed the plane blamed corporations and government equally, never particularly blaming liberals or conservatives.
And I’ve probably been debating with pants too long and have gathered the concept of liberal views, I apologize on that front. I do know a couple of people like that (or knew), but ultimately they are entirely inconsequential and have hopefully grown up.
As to attacking these people, are you implying that they are all secretly okay with killing people and actually want to have all the liberal’s murdered? What are you trying to say?