Quotes of the day

posted at 10:18 pm on January 14, 2011 by Allahpundit

“One of the wounded in the Tucson, Ariz., shooting that left Rep. Gabrielle Giffords critically injured is blaming Sarah Palin, House Speaker John Boehner, Fox TV host Glenn Beck and former Nevada GOP Senate candidate Sharron Angle for the tragedy.

“It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target,’ Eric Fuller said in an interview with Democracy NOW…

“‘Their wish for Second Amendment activism has been fulfilled — senseless hatred leading to murder, lunatic fringe anarchism, subscribed to by John Boehner, mainstream rebels with vengeance for all — even 9-year-old girls,’ he added, referring to the death of Christina Taylor Green…

“‘I would put Sarah Palin in first place there. I think, really, she should be incarcerated for treason for advocating assassinating public officials,’ Fuller said in an interview with Media Matters.”

***
“By Monday, The New York Times’ editorial page had kicked into action. It conceded that, sure, Loughner operated ‘well beyond usual ideological categories,’ but, still, it was ‘legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge.’ The Los Angeles Times followed suit. It admitted that, sure, Loughner and ‘his own demons were primarily to blame,’ but it still condemned the ‘increasingly incendiary and violent rhetoric that characterizes today’s political debate,’ for which ‘the right bears the brunt of responsibility.’ Meanwhile, dozens of opinion writers were busily adding related but equally ethereal musings to the heap. Writing in the Guardian, blogger Jessica Valenti blamed a ‘country that sees masculinity—especially violent masculinity—as the ideal.’

“There is of course one advantage to all such lines of argument, if argument is the word for it. They are entirely faith-based, which makes them pretty much irrefutable. But faith-based punditry works in more than one direction. Seven years after the massacre at Columbine High School—in which two senior students shot and killed twelve students and a teacher—CBS News invited Brian Rohrbough, who had lost his son Dan, to explain why he thought the shootings had happened. ‘The public school system has taught in a moral vacuum, expelling God from the school and from the government, replacing him with evolution, where the strong kill the weak, without moral consequences and life has no inherent value,’ Rohrbough said. ‘And I assure you the murder of innocent children is always wrong, including by abortion. Abortion has diminished the value of children.’ Most liberals (myself included) would disagree with Rohrbough’s explanation for the shooting, but they’d have trouble explaining why it’s any less plausible or substantive than explanations blaming Jared Loughner on rightwing hysteria.”

***
“ABC News host George Stephanopoulos refuses to admit fault or issue a correction for implying politics had something to do with accused Tucson tragedy shooter Jared Lee Loughner’s motives…

“TheDC also asked the Washington Post, the New York Times and CNN if they were going to run corrections for the mistakes their reporters, anchors and columnists made.

“An editorial page assistant at the New York Times said it was up to columnist Paul Krugman whether he was going to run a correction for his mistakes. Krugman asserted that the Tea Party movement factored into Loughner’s shooting of Giffords and 19 other people on Saturday.

“The Post and CNN failed to respond to TheDC’s requests for comment.”

***
Via Greg Hengler.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6

Forgive the 3 posts in a row, but it just dawned on me that it is Fuller who might be planning a suit and laying the groundwork. Or thinking he is anyway.

jeanie on January 15, 2011 at 11:31 AM

Oh, boy. Let him.

ddrintn on January 15, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Will the socialist media win this war against Palin???

royzer on January 15, 2011 at 11:38 AM

The Media have made her the second most powerful person in the country. They are losing.

SurferDoc on January 15, 2011 at 11:42 AM

Will the socialist media win this war against Palin???

royzer on January 15, 2011 at 11:38 AM

What do you think? They have done everything, including subtly calling for some leftist nutjob to kill her, and she still stands defiantly.

darwin on January 15, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Lying scum, whether with a microphone or pen, are still lying scum. It is the microphone and pen that give them faux credibility; regardless of how they abuse them.

Extrafishy on January 15, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Will the socialist media win this war against Palin???

royzer on January 15, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Only if she let’s them. Her strength is amazing but even the strongest can break under pressure. Being accused of mass murder is in such a category of it’s own that it leaves you breathless. By the way, on our sister blog, TownHall, this AM O’Reilly goes on and on about the vile anonymous haters on blogs almost implying that we ARE responsible for these murders in some cyber fashion? I don’t know about y’all, but sounds like he’s promoting ‘neutrality’????

jeanie on January 15, 2011 at 11:53 AM

By accusing Palin of mass murder, the MSM has “jumped the shark” (again!).

By blaming the voices of those who the shooter never listened to, the MSM advocates government control of speech…and descends into a cartoon-like parody of itself.

landlines on January 15, 2011 at 12:04 PM

landlines,

still waiting to see where the MSM accused Palin of mass murder.

incitement to violence seems to be as far as it goes.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 12:33 PM

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Hi, Skippy. You’re wrong again.

kingsjester on January 15, 2011 at 12:42 PM

jes’

fix your link so’s I can be all abashed and whatnot.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Sorry about the bad link. Please refer to the Headline section above or this link, instead.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/257249/blame-palin-katrina-trinko?page=2
The MSM was implicit in the unfounded attack against Palin.

kingsjester on January 15, 2011 at 1:14 PM

kingsjester, no prob.

and no argument that Palin was reviled for her rhetoric, said to have helped foster the atmosphere of violence about which Gifford issued a warning, and condemned for her refusal to respond to Gifford’s request to tone it down.
she was widely held to bear blame, and some of the more shrill folks thought that she might even be considered as having some legal responsibility.

but that still doesn’t add up to the MSM calling her a murderer.

I’m making the small point that “murderer” wasn’t the charge.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Not by any of the MSM writers that I’ve seen. But by Far Left Bloggers, yes.

kingsjester on January 15, 2011 at 1:31 PM

maverick muse on January 15, 2011 at 8:10 AM

A tour de force!!!!!

tigerlily on January 15, 2011 at 1:34 PM

kingsjester,

by some loonies, sure.

but I keep reading from people on this site that the MSM is calling her murderer, and that’s wrong and way over the top.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 1:52 PM

The BLM is now simply taunting Sarah.

They have no clue. She has the patience of Job and the wisdom of Solomon. They won’t get under her skin.

davidk on January 15, 2011 at 2:42 PM

and the wisdom of Solomon

You’re saying that people other than yourself are clueless?????

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 3:11 PM

but I keep reading from people on this site that the MSM is calling her murderer, and that’s wrong and way over the top.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Hahahahaha hahahahahahahahaha

Over the top?

Hahahahahahahahahahaha

Audiclueless

darwin on January 15, 2011 at 3:18 PM

audiculous

In your mind someone can be characterized as “widely held to bear blame” for a murder and “might even be considered as having some legal responsibility” for a murder in which she had no involvement, but it’s “wrong” and “way over the top” to equate that characterization with being called a murderer. Like it’s so much better for one’s reputation to have the press going around saying “She should be ashamed of herself for her role in that murder” or “She should be in jail for that murder” as opposed to a more direct accusation. The press knows what it’s doing. If they accuse her of pulling the trigger, of course they open themselves up to a lawsuit. So they do what they can to create the same impression without quite saying so. If you call some B.S. artist out, you call them out on what they are trying to do. In the real world, going around saying “audiculous should be in jail for that bank robbery” is tantamount to saying “audiculous robbed that bank” since the only reason to say the former is in order to create the impression of the latter in the listener’s mind.

shazbat on January 15, 2011 at 3:25 PM

shazbat, I understand the point that you and many others are making and my response is that yes, they press piled on her, and yes, it’s not really her fault.

but again, the tactic or making accusations that are literally less harsh than the expected interpretation in the mind of your audience is something with which Palin is well familiar and in which she is neck-deep.
She has used it on numerous occasions, lately saying that Obama is deliberately weakening the country, and by using the horrifically overblown term “blood libel” to defend herself against the criticism. That was gross and inappropriate.

going around saying “audiculous should be in jail for that bank robbery” is tantamount to saying “audiculous robbed that bank”

I used to work with an old detective lieutenant used to say that very thing about the people who changed the design of banks so that teller’s no longer were in cages and no longer had protection against robbers.
He used to grumble that every one of those &*())* designers should have their candy asses thrown in prison and that they were more guilty than the poor slobs who committed the stick-ups.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 4:23 PM

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Lord you’re dense.

Audiclueless!!

darwin on January 15, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Lord you’re dense.

Audiclueless!!

darwin

It’s because I was born on Krypton or something.

Your excuse?

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 4:35 PM

It’s because I was born on Krypton or something.

Your excuse?

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Still living in fantasyland huh? Figures.

darwin on January 15, 2011 at 4:46 PM

darwin,

would that I were. the world seems all too real and drear some days,
but perhaps I’m not quite as dense as I’m charged with being.

yourself?

do you live in a world where, as someone hereabouts said, Sarah Palin has the patience of Job and the wisdom of Solomon?

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 5:00 PM

but perhaps I’m not quite as dense as I’m charged with being.

Perhaps dense is the wrong word. Dishonest is more apt.

Congrats! You’re not dense, just dishonest! But wait … could you be unintentionally dishonest because you’re dense?

Questions, questions …

do you live in a world where, as someone hereabouts said, Sarah Palin has the patience of Job and the wisdom of Solomon?

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Look at everything Palin has had to deal with, and she’s still considered the left’s number one target and enemy.

You tell me.

darwin on January 15, 2011 at 5:16 PM

darwin,

Palin dishes out plenty and takes more crap than she deserves. She’s far from the only person in public life that gets more than a fair share of abuse.

But patience in the face of negativity is the smaller part of my question.

You have a response to “wisdom of Solomon”?

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 6:26 PM

You have a response to “wisdom of Solomon”?

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 6:26 PM

No, why should I? You’re the one taking one comment and making it into the Holy Grail of right thought. Since you’re so concerned with one comment … you expand on it.

darwin on January 15, 2011 at 6:39 PM

No reason that you should and no problem from me if you decline to endorse that statement.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 6:46 PM

audiculous

If “blood libel” means anything in modern usage, it means a vicious and borderline absurd lie intended to anathematize the target as a bloodthirsty maniac. This was the exact purpose of spreading the meme that Palin put cross hairs on the political map in hopes that some unhinged character would do the wet work of shooting Giffords.

And when Palin says that Obama is deliberately trying to weaken the country, she is highlighting the left’s “post-American world” crap. (Obama prominently carried around the book on this subject and wanted people to know he was reading it.) Liberalism is egalitarian and “Procrustean”. It seeks to reduce power disparities. Saying Obama deliberately wants to weaken America is as true as saying the NFL draft rules or team salary caps deliberately seek to weaken the dominant teams in the league relative to the others. It might sound odd to hear it expressed that way, but of course these rules are designed deliberately to weaken the dominant players. Obama looks at America like it’s the Patriots headed for another Super Bowl trophy and he wants the other teams to have a chance. It is not a charitable way of characterizing his efforts, to be sure, but it is not a wild accusation. I can assure that the proposition that America is too powerful and should be knocked down a peg or two is quite uncontroversial in the faculty lounges where our apologizer-in-chief developed his political philosophy.

shazbat on January 15, 2011 at 9:18 PM

And now, said victim, Eric Fuller, has been arrested and involuntarilly commited for threatening a tea party leader at a town hall meeting today. Sounds like Democracy Now and Media Matters must have pushed him over the edge. They really need to dial down the hate rehetoric at those outlets…

Big John on January 15, 2011 at 10:56 PM

If “blood libel” means anything in modern usage

shazbat

blood libel has a single, very specific meaning. Palin was very wrong to apply that to her self over this. It’s cause for embarrassment that she did and worse, I doubt that she realizes that.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 11:25 PM

shazbat, if she wants to say that Obama’s policies will result in a weakening of the country, that’s fair and fine with me.

she wants to say that the guy deliberately intends to harm the country despite seeking the presidency and being elected and swearing to protect and defend, that’s not fine.
Not without some proof and not based on the thinking of other people in faculty lounges.
If there’s solid evidence that he thinks it good to harm the country AND evidence that he’s deliberately doing it, she either puts it up or shuts up.
Or she’s an idiot punk not worthy of the loyalty and trust accorded her by people here.

audiculous on January 15, 2011 at 11:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6