Yep, She REALLY Said It!

@anniepa (26086)
United States
March 11, 2011 9:57pm CST
I'm sure you all remember the outrage over Sister Sarah Palin being "blamed" for the tragic shooting in Arizona a few months ago and how she made a video which went online the same day as the memorial in Tuscon where the President was speaking in which she went on and on about how unfairly she'd been treated by the media. I can understand nobody would want to be unjustly "blamed" for something like that and those who did so outright were out of line. However, I didn't and don't think there was nothing wrong with anyone pointing out that the rhetoric had been getting too violent and hateful recently and should be toned down. Sarah and her loyal followers disagreed with me completely. There was nothing wrong with the type of rhetoric political figures like she used or the imagery of rifle cross-hairs on maps and the like. Things like that do NOT incite violence; if someone hurts someone else it's the fault of the perpetrator alone and that's all there is to it. That was then and THIS (see below) is now: http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/002849/ She ends by saying (and I'm paraphrasing), "It's up to the union leaders to tone down this rhetoric before someone gets hurt." Sarah fans, please tell me - was she wrong back then or is she wrong now? Obviously, she couldn't possibly have been right both times! Annie
1 person likes this
3 responses
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
12 Mar 11
Annie, that woman has no real idea what she says or what she does! At this moment, I'm remembering the fish she was beating, on a boat, with some sort of big club ... I mean, if you've already got the fish in the boat, why beat viciously beat it ... the fish didn't appear to be killer WHALES or man eating!! I think the republican party "heads" no they cannot afford this woman! Even without her, they've failed to rebrand, even though those who voted gave them another opportunity to make good govering calls, they've failed in less than 2 months as "leaders" of the House ... WHERE ARE THE JOBS and all the spending cuts ... meager, painful cuts to those who are most needy, they've failed to be honest brokers and cut tax giveaways in the billions to those most wealthy! Once agein, epic failures!
@debrakcarey (19925)
• United States
12 Mar 11
Spending cuts are why the protesters went to the streets in Wisconsin. D@mned if they do, d@mned if they don't.
@Taskr36 (13928)
• United States
12 Mar 11
"they've failed in less than 2 months..." Lol! I LOVE the hypocrisy! There is nothing better than people who insist that Obama should not be judged after years in office with a supermajority in both houses and then later say that Republicans have failed for not fixing everything in 2 MONTHS with the majority only in the house and democrats blocking all their plans in the senate. All that aside your post completely ignored the topic of the discussion. Annie did not write this as a "bash republicans" thread.
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16662)
• Boston, Massachusetts
12 Mar 11
I think it's important to know that Gladys watched Sarah Palin's Alaska. And Killer Whales aren't fish at all, they're mammals.
@jerzgirl (7591)
• Gloucester City, New Jersey
12 Mar 11
I haven't seen anyone's responses, so what I'm saying now is my own opinion. I don't know if I'll be right or wrong with regard to how someone responds. But, I'm seeing the GOP, especially the far right Tea Party aspect of it, becoming more and more cult-like. Having been a member of a pseudo-Christian cult for 10 years, I'm seeing the similarities between them. Reliance on leadership to provide the answers to life's problems and to provide a prescribed solution to those problems; a dependence on those same leaders to the point of an unwillingness to act without their direct guidance; a perverted logic that says if what they're saying now differs from what they said then it's because what they said then was right for then and what they're saying now is right for now - therefore, there is no conflict and no reason to question their words; the idea that to question anything leadership says or does is a sign of deviance from the cause and justification for removal from the group; the idea that the groups members need not worry because the leadership will never lead them astray, that God is with them and that leadership will do all the thinking for them - don't worry their pretty little heads about any of it. Are there exceptions to both leaders and members? Absolutely - but they are rarely heard from or noticed since to make themselves visible would invite immediate chastisement and call for their removal (think Harry Reid and how his fellow Mormon church members view him). So, I'm going to venture that there will be a defense of her words and it will be very much that the two situations are different, that her words then were justified and her words now are justified and, yes, she is right in both cases. I think it's utterly frightening and not unlike the behavior that led to Jonestown.
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
12 Mar 11
jerzgirl, I think you're right! And, it is scary. We are not being told that we must not rely upon or read "liberal" ... surely we must not offer any "liberal" medium's news reporting ... this has become the argument ... not the issue at hand, but what the source of the news is! What's so incredible to me is that most who demand such a thing constantly offer Fox "news" sources to support any argument they bring! That too is scary! There is to be only ONE side to any conversation ... is that a conversation?
1 person likes this
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
12 Mar 11
Correction = "we are NOW being told ..."
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13928)
• United States
12 Mar 11
Gladys, you can read whatever you want, but relying on blogs and fatmouths for news is simply foolish. An intelligent person knows that there is a big difference between "left wing media" and "left wing blogs". The reporting on MSNBC, for example, is extremely left wing. That said the REPORTING, not the fat mouths, is generally accurate. They just chose to focus on stories that promote their agenda while ignoring those that do not. A left wing blog, however, has no standards and there is nothing to keep them from misrepresenting, or blatantly lying about, a news story. They'll even make up stories to smear people they disagree with. As you can see Annie linked to DailyKOS, a source she enjoys very much. They made their stamp on the 2008 for inventing a bogus story that Sarah Palin's youngest son was really Bristol's son.
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19925)
• United States
12 Mar 11
Ohhh...ok, now I get it. PALIN said, there's nothing wrong with that type of rhetoric, that it didn't incite violence. And then she said the union folks should tone down their rhetoric before someone gets hurt. So you all think she was talking out of both sides of her mouth? What I said before still stands. Palin's use of cross hairs is not inciting violence,if it is, the democrats have done it too, before she ever did. So her 'rhetoric' is not the same as the very real threats of doing bodily harm and threatening riots that the democrats have used since.
@anniepa (26086)
• United States
13 Mar 11
I don't "think" I KNOW she's talking out of both sides of her mouth, and the way she rambles on that's quite a mouthful...lol! What I've said for months still stands. There is no need for anyone from either party to use cross hairs on maps depicting Congressional districts or phrases like "lock and load", "armed and dangerous" or "2nd Amendment remedies" when talking about a political opponent. I'm not accusing anyone of inciting violence I'm just saying there's no need for it and since what happened in Arizona everyone should step back and think before they speak or post violent terminology or imagery. What she actually said recently was that union leaders are responsible for toning down the rhetoric. It's not the union leaders who are doing the threatening anymore than it was Sarah Palin who shot Gaby Giffords and those other people in Tucson. Annie
@anniepa (26086)
• United States
13 Mar 11
Rollo, I really can do without your condescension, thank you very much. As you well know, I'm perfectly aware of the context of balloon head's words but the fact remains SHE USED THOSE WORDS and given the climate today I think she and others, regardless of party or ideology, who have used those types of metaphors should tone it down. Annie
@Rollo1 (16662)
• Boston, Massachusetts
13 Mar 11
Given the climate of today, the only real dangerous use of those words is by people who continue to spread the misconception that she meant something other than she did. The people she said it to had no such idea but everyone who has read the "snippet" on a blog or a forum with the assertion that she meant to encourage violence will believe it and amongst those people could be someone who decides to commit violence in retribution. I don't think there is any good reason to spread half-truths knowingly.