Howard Kurtz
Sorry, liberals, but you can’t blame Palin for the Giffords shooting
Let’s be honest: Journalists often use military terminology in describing campaigns. We talk about the air war, the bombshells, targeting politicians, knocking them off, candidates returning fire or being out of ammunition. So we shouldn’t act shocked when politicians do the same thing. Obviously, Palin should have used dots or asterisks on her map. But does anyone seriously believe she was trying to incite violence?…
This isn’t about a nearly year-old Sarah Palin map; it’s about a lone nutjob who doesn’t value human life. It would be nice if we briefly put aside partisan differences and came together with sympathy and support for Gabby Giffords and the other victims, rather than opening rhetorical fire ourselves.
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: « Previous 1 2 3
Do you think it was a smart thing to do politically? Do you know what impolitic means?
She is in no way to blame for what happened. That goes without saying. But why can’t you admit that she made an unforced political error which gave the Left, er, ammunition to use in their persistent lie that we are dangerous extremists? Surely you know we cannot rely on the MSM to correct these unsubstantiated falsehoods, particularly when we have a Homeland Security Secretary acting as an enabler?
Buy Danish on January 9, 2011 at 1:23 PM
Sadly, Gerry may be right about this. It all depends on whether they can create the perception they intend. Facts don’t matter to them. It’s the perception they want.
I agree with the_nile that this isn’t just an attack on Palin. This is an attack on conservatism, especially the virulent Tea Party variety.
If they can’t paint us with Loughner, they’ll find some other violence to use, maybe even manufacturing it if need be. I believe the Soros/MoveOn people intended this to be a fight not just for 2012, but for the generations. Dangerous times.
petefrt on January 9, 2011 at 1:29 PM
FBI director, in interview now on FNC, just issued veiled attack on talk radio.
petefrt on January 9, 2011 at 1:34 PM
Bingo!
petefrt on January 9, 2011 at 1:40 PM
Buy Danish: Well, if those were indeed crosshairs and not survey sights, you might be correct.
Or are you going to argue that anything that could be construed as crosshairs is now verboten?
The latter is actually a more defensible argument, but not one that conservatives, by and large, support.
Scott H on January 9, 2011 at 1:48 PM
I’m not saying anything is “verboten”. I’m saying it’s a stupid thing to do because of the predictable consequences. Arguing over whether they are “cross hairs” or “survey sights” is irrelevant. It’s all about emotional responses based on perception and symbolism which drown out rational arguments, and thus matter very little in situations like this.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2011 at 2:53 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3