Not because I'm a liberal, though I am, and not because Loughner's a conservative (his own friends say he was neither right nor left, and Ayn Rand and Mein Kampf are strange favorites for liberals). It's because of one of the best examples of what Ms. Palin and others call "blood libel":
Care to take a wild "shot" at the speaker?
US Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) ten months before Jared Loughner shot her in the head.
And there is actual evidence that he had a thing for Giffords, IIRC. I think he harassed her or stalked her or something prior to this. If we are going to blame anyone else for inspiring Loughner's actions, why not look at the person we know he actually paid attention to? So far as I know, there is no evidence that he paid any attention to Sarah Palin or knew about her crosshairs map from his own interest. What if it was the object of his attention sniveling about how the mean lady with no actual power was scaring her that got Loughner thinking "If she wants to be afraid, I'll give her something to be scared of!"We're in Sarah Palin's 'targeted' list, but the thing is that the way she has it depicted, we're in the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they've got to realize that there are consequences to that action.
Care to take a wild "shot" at the speaker?
US Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) ten months before Jared Loughner shot her in the head.
Why, if I were Sarah Palin I'd fly to that hospital and tell her to watch her mouth! Though she's still unable to speak; maybe the "blood libel" has solved itself: YOU'RE safe now, Sarah! 
How tragic that nearly being murdered has blinded Rep. Giffords to the REAL victim: Sarah Palin. :vomits:
So she's just supposed to roll over and accept the blame for something she had absolutely nothing to do with? Not to mention the kind of crap that's been dumped on her all out of proportion to her actual importance or transgressions has probably made lashing back a defensive reflex by now. When thousands of people are accusing of complicity in a mass murder, sensitivity should not be a requirement in your defense. How tragic that nearly being murdered has blinded Rep. Giffords to the REAL victim: Sarah Palin. :vomits:It was logical for the media to connect Palins imagery with the attack, since Rep. Gifford did, too,a year before it happened. If someone had been running all over Britain yelling, "Blast Parliament!" in the summer of 1605, most people would probably have thought Guy Fawkes had them in mind that November.
And if Gifford had been VOTED OUT OF OFFICE as Palin was encouraging, then you could assing a share of the "blame" to Palin. Your disingenuous comparison does not change the fact that the and concepts of "target" and "aim" and other shooting imagery are routinely used without the slightest violent intention or connotation. It was irresponsible not to wait for all the facts before publicizing those suspicions, true; on the other hand, Ms. Palin is in no position to lecture anyone on careless language. I don't believe for a moment she intended or expected this to happen, but she SHOULD'VE expected that in a nation of 300 million there was a good chance some nut would take her literally, and if she didn't I don't want her running the local quickie mart. Yeah, a lot of liberals were too quick to shout, "J'ACCUSE!" but Palin in particular was far too eager to wash her hands of it, and the only reason she didn't do it quicker is probably because she spent the first couple days making calls to see if she'd gotten six people killed and injured thirteen more. She knows it, I know it and the American people ought to know it.
Sorry, I REALLY didn't want to examine the potential political relevance to this horrible tragedy, and I really don't think the connection with Palin is more than eerie coincidence. We don't know; Loughner's saying nothing. However, it very easily COULD'VE been connected, so easily that the first victim EXPECTED something like this based solely on Palins comments and imagery, and calling that "blood libel" is quite literally blaming the victim. Whatever happened to "personal accountability"? Were those just more words we shouldn't take seriously...?
You dare to invoke those words while attempting to foist off ANY of the blame for a single individual's actions on a complete stranger based on images there is no proof he saw? Jodie Foster has more guilt for the shooting of James Brady than Palin (or Beck or Limbaugh or whoever the left's bete noir of the day happens to be) bears for this.
Sorry, I REALLY didn't want to examine the potential political relevance to this horrible tragedy, and I really don't think the connection with Palin is more than eerie coincidence. We don't know; Loughner's saying nothing. However, it very easily COULD'VE been connected, so easily that the first victim EXPECTED something like this based solely on Palins comments and imagery, and calling that "blood libel" is quite literally blaming the victim. Whatever happened to "personal accountability"? Were those just more words we shouldn't take seriously...?
Cannoli
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Inde muagdhe Aes Sedai misain ye!
Deus Vult!
*MySmiley*
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Inde muagdhe Aes Sedai misain ye!
Deus Vult!
*MySmiley*
OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS.
- 16/01/2011 12:18:22 PM
1989 Views
Why are they calling it "blood libel"?
- 16/01/2011 12:23:47 PM
851 Views
Because if the facts were as they represent them those words would be applicable.
- 16/01/2011 12:49:22 PM
1029 Views
It's not entirely clear to me whether you're aware of this or not, but...
- 16/01/2011 01:12:22 PM
1074 Views
I think Alan Dershowitz dealt with this nonsense already
- 16/01/2011 02:34:10 PM
1366 Views
Interesting. I didn't realize it was so wide-spread.
- 16/01/2011 03:10:28 PM
925 Views
She wasn't even the first to use the term that week either
- 16/01/2011 10:10:35 PM
928 Views
I don't know that "expert" has anything to do with it.
- 16/01/2011 10:18:54 PM
956 Views
Oh please don't you start to
- 17/01/2011 02:34:43 PM
809 Views
I for one hadn't noticed it before.
- 17/01/2011 10:25:57 PM
979 Views
it was used here and nobody commented
- 17/01/2011 10:37:07 PM
869 Views
LOL, I totally forgot that got posted here
- 17/01/2011 10:54:26 PM
920 Views
It's funny you should say that...
- 18/01/2011 10:32:59 PM
952 Views
Precisely: I noticed, but it hadn't become a rallying cry for "the real victim" (Palin).
- 19/01/2011 12:14:48 AM
1061 Views
I thought you were the real vicitim
- 19/01/2011 02:49:06 PM
1034 Views
When and where did I say that? The ultimate victim is America, but six members of it just died.
- 19/01/2011 11:24:27 PM
756 Views
Re: It's funny you should say that...
- 19/01/2011 03:29:52 PM
938 Views
It was permissible to ignore until it became a rallying cry.
- 20/01/2011 04:27:23 PM
961 Views
Oh, I noticed that one alright.
- 18/01/2011 10:25:23 PM
792 Views
but is he accussed of being a tasteless moron who doesn't know what it means?
- 19/01/2011 02:28:03 PM
838 Views
I don't know, if I have to judge him based on that one article, then tasteless moron, absolutely.
- 19/01/2011 06:14:43 PM
952 Views
The peole who called her stupid for using the term didn't know it was so wide spread either
- 17/01/2011 02:33:19 PM
812 Views
Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him.
- 16/01/2011 10:24:09 PM
1005 Views
Re: Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him.
- 16/01/2011 11:09:21 PM
1035 Views
Again, Giffords specifically made the connection between Palins imagery and an attack on her.
- 17/01/2011 12:53:08 AM
1172 Views
That means precisely nothing
- 17/01/2011 03:59:07 PM
871 Views
It means everything.
- 18/01/2011 08:34:55 PM
1140 Views
I'm trying to understand your logic
- 19/01/2011 12:50:28 AM
745 Views
There are two points:
- 19/01/2011 02:47:48 AM
932 Views
I don't agree, but I understand. *NM*
- 19/01/2011 10:14:13 PM
458 Views
Giffords' statements and Palins are matters of public record; they're indisputable.
- 19/01/2011 11:34:53 PM
909 Views
I must say, if more people on both sides could say that we'd all be better for it.
- 20/01/2011 04:32:55 AM
951 Views
the old step one steal underwear step three profit argument
- 19/01/2011 06:01:14 PM
1025 Views
Your inability/unwillingness to follow basic and clearly delineated logic is not my failing.
- 20/01/2011 01:19:31 AM
846 Views
I admit I can't follow gnome logic *NM*
- 20/01/2011 05:50:22 AM
448 Views
I demonstrated the connection, whether or not you choose to look the other way.
- 20/01/2011 03:16:28 PM
923 Views
that is some twisted and bizarre logic
- 17/01/2011 02:38:41 PM
970 Views
Giffords said Palins crosshairs imagery would have "consequences"; Palin calls the suggestion libel.
- 18/01/2011 08:54:45 PM
863 Views
yes but the only consequences is liberals using them to slander Palin
- 19/01/2011 02:58:35 PM
943 Views
I read Toms reply; I don't think he exactly vindicated your position, nor meant to do so.
- 20/01/2011 01:52:37 AM
1179 Views
It was an example of blaming the victim, a phrase you keep misusing
- 20/01/2011 06:28:21 PM
884 Views
I thought you said only liberals blinded by political bias committed that grave sin.
- 20/01/2011 07:47:09 PM
931 Views
so in other words you again missed the point
- 20/01/2011 08:26:49 PM
881 Views
Well, one of us did.
- 20/01/2011 09:24:35 PM
994 Views
so lets be clear do you or don't you understand what it means to "blame the vicitm"?
- 20/01/2011 10:03:48 PM
636 Views
I understand it well; can we be equally clear you say the victim here is Palin?
- 20/01/2011 10:44:08 PM
1070 Views
So I am a little confused on something...
- 16/01/2011 02:38:59 PM
1028 Views
Palin putting Giffords district in the crosshairs and Giffords implying at the time she feared this
- 16/01/2011 11:21:36 PM
1162 Views
If I understand what you are saying correctly...
- 17/01/2011 07:07:56 AM
900 Views
I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand.
- 17/01/2011 08:33:47 AM
908 Views
Re: I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand.
- 17/01/2011 04:24:01 PM
962 Views
The Secret Service does guard Congressmen, just not all of them automatically.
- 18/01/2011 09:13:39 PM
798 Views
No, they don't
- 18/01/2011 10:19:34 PM
985 Views
Really? Cannoli says differently, and I believe he's right on that one.
- 18/01/2011 10:50:51 PM
1064 Views
You seem to be reading what you want to from what I said
- 19/01/2011 01:27:32 PM
914 Views
I read what you said & understood it as you restate here, hence I referenced local police (twice)
- 20/01/2011 02:15:17 AM
949 Views
The problem here is your ignoring normal policing powers to concoct an absurdity
- 20/01/2011 04:20:25 PM
999 Views
More absurd than the notion such incitement warrants no notice?
- 20/01/2011 05:42:47 PM
1059 Views
really because people post that kind of crap daily and nothing happens
- 20/01/2011 05:57:52 PM
856 Views
I thought waterboarding was OK and any suggestion to the contrary was terrorist sympathizing. 
- 20/01/2011 07:54:05 PM
809 Views
- 20/01/2011 07:54:05 PM
809 Views
way to dodge the point again
- 20/01/2011 08:34:33 PM
817 Views
Do you have an example of a credible threat of injury to a Congressman, or calls for one?
- 20/01/2011 10:02:53 PM
899 Views
Your shifting your original premise, *again*
- 20/01/2011 08:24:18 PM
884 Views
No, you're simply missing the point of it.
- 20/01/2011 11:09:57 PM
882 Views
Uh...Last I checked conservatives didn't list the Communist Manifesto as a favourite book.
- 16/01/2011 03:05:07 PM
1199 Views
Libs hate Mein Kampf and We the Living; conservatives hate the Communist Manifesto: He's neither.
- 16/01/2011 10:06:02 PM
899 Views
conseartives hate Mein Kampf and liberals stil read the Communist Manifesto
- 17/01/2011 02:57:22 PM
878 Views
That first line is says it all.
- 18/01/2011 09:34:06 PM
961 Views
Nazis had more in common with communist then capitalist
- 19/01/2011 04:10:09 PM
1067 Views
The founder of fascism called it "the merger of corporate and national power".
- 20/01/2011 02:51:09 AM
951 Views
It is to be expected that this site would be libtard central...
- 16/01/2011 05:23:53 PM
1155 Views
Again, I don't think Palin intended this, but Giffords feared ten months ago that this could result.
- 16/01/2011 11:29:19 PM
960 Views
And I call bullshit
- 18/01/2011 03:12:13 PM
1101 Views
If Palin wants to accuse Giffords of libel she should have the guts to do it to her face.
- 18/01/2011 10:39:07 PM
1059 Views
So if some jihadist shot Gifford, would you also blame Palin?
- 19/01/2011 02:52:42 PM
943 Views
don't get ti doesn't matter who is to blame it just matters if they can use it *NM*
- 19/01/2011 04:11:09 PM
425 Views
No, I'd blame the shooter first and the mullahs shouting, "JIHAD111" second, as I always do.
- 20/01/2011 03:11:33 AM
1040 Views
Then why are you even here? I pretty much agree with you entirely and I'm fairly liberal. *NM*
- 18/01/2011 01:16:33 PM
534 Views
Palin didn't really have anything to do with this, but it makes sense she's blamed.
- 16/01/2011 10:19:51 PM
878 Views
Did they ever catch the person(s) that vandalized Gifford's office? *NM*
- 17/01/2011 03:30:36 AM
448 Views
I didn't realize someone had, but it appears a militia leader was responsible (shocking, I know).
- 17/01/2011 07:04:08 AM
897 Views
politcal offices are vandalized on a regular basis *NM*
- 17/01/2011 02:41:29 PM
408 Views
She only asked if they caught the guy, she didn't accuse anyone, Sarah. 
- 18/01/2011 11:27:18 PM
845 Views
- 18/01/2011 11:27:18 PM
845 Views
Took you this long, huh?
- 17/01/2011 01:53:31 PM
798 Views
I didn't want to look because I was afraid the charges against the far right demagogues might stick.
- 18/01/2011 11:07:26 PM
1123 Views
I am sick of the desperate attempts of liberals to find a way to use a tragedy
- 17/01/2011 02:31:18 PM
814 Views
I'm just curious.
- 17/01/2011 03:23:47 PM
790 Views
Had that convo with the cab driver on the way home from a New Years party.
- 18/01/2011 11:42:07 PM
1084 Views
If slander, not mine, Giffords' (at least you don't err like Palin and say, "libel" ).
- 18/01/2011 11:14:23 PM
1007 Views
mark you calendar today is the day Joel offically went around the bend into insanity
- 19/01/2011 05:28:06 PM
813 Views
A mirror will show me who's to blame? On whom have I put a crosshairs?
- 20/01/2011 03:23:43 AM
867 Views
so it is all a matter of faith for you
- 20/01/2011 05:48:44 AM
818 Views
No, it's fairly straight forward logic.
- 20/01/2011 03:25:56 PM
923 Views
sorry Joel but you haven't
- 20/01/2011 03:29:49 PM
728 Views
It's there; in this thread alone people from both sides of the aisle have acknowledged that.
- 20/01/2011 05:51:21 PM
821 Views
only in your does the connection exisit
- 20/01/2011 06:39:35 PM
855 Views
No.
- 20/01/2011 07:35:09 PM
934 Views
dude wake up
- 20/01/2011 08:54:33 PM
1074 Views
Fine, I have no problem dropping the "right" label in my condemnations.
- 20/01/2011 10:39:34 PM
1050 Views
Why not just blame Giffords?
- 17/01/2011 06:07:14 PM
1151 Views
Indeed, why not; Sarah Palin does.
- 18/01/2011 06:58:01 PM
970 Views
The left are the ones storing up hate with their pathetic slaner
- 18/01/2011 07:53:23 PM
925 Views
At least 95% of the blame is Loughners; he's a nut, but that doesn't exonerate the demagogues.
- 18/01/2011 11:24:11 PM
1020 Views
0% belongs to political rhetoric from the right
- 19/01/2011 02:47:56 PM
786 Views
Uh huh; it's absurd to mention right wing rhetoric when left wing rhetoric is the OBVIOUS culprit
- 19/01/2011 02:59:41 PM
830 Views
- 19/01/2011 02:59:41 PM
830 Views
No leftist rhetoric? You just called a bunch of people 'dangeorus lunatics'
- 19/01/2011 03:37:54 PM
798 Views
Rhetoric is one thing, but I didn't use violent imagery, did I?
- 20/01/2011 01:40:14 AM
1124 Views
no but the democratic party used very similar images in the same state
- 20/01/2011 06:41:19 PM
856 Views
It's news to me, but I condemn all violent inflammatory imagery and rhetoric.
- 20/01/2011 07:13:18 PM
827 Views
it was the national democrats
- 20/01/2011 08:32:01 PM
928 Views
Then that's equally dangerous and reprehensible and more reason to loathe the DLC and DCCC.
- 20/01/2011 09:49:08 PM
1197 Views
The right is not the ones claiming rhetoric is the issue
- 19/01/2011 03:58:39 PM
841 Views
"WE aren't doing it, except for when we are". Admission of guilt is a poor defense.
- 20/01/2011 03:25:16 AM
817 Views
The irony of this thread is not lost on me.
- 19/01/2011 04:09:01 PM
991 Views
Bizarre thread for that Soapbox
- 19/01/2011 05:17:58 PM
740 Views
You missed the point, obviously.
- 19/01/2011 06:04:23 PM
850 Views
Check your NB. Noted you a response. *NM*
That I knew it would go this way is why I avoided looking closely for so long.
- 19/01/2011 11:20:44 PM
997 Views
Re: OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS.
- 22/01/2011 05:49:44 PM
1004 Views
We can debate whether it's coincidental, but the connections are documented fact
- 22/01/2011 08:17:24 PM
973 Views