Clyburn: Palin Intellectually Unable To 'Understand What's Going On'

I am sure she will make it all about her.

It was the Left that pulled her into it! The Left keeps her name active!

The left forced Palin to put cross hairs on Giffords? The left forced her to coincidentally take them off the web after this incident? Is Sarah now controlled by the left?
Really?

LOLOLOLOLOL the left keeps her in the lime light? really?

Or do you mean her stupid mouth and her stupid antics and the fact she is on fox and runs arround with the tea party and promotes candidates is keeping her in the news?

Conservative Conspirator you are hilarious my friend.

We dont do anything she does this to herself.

I do not think that Palin's crosshairs ad caused Loughner to go on this shooting rampage.

I would like to point out that Loughner did use a "Second Amendment Remedy". He singled Giffords out and used a "Second Amendment Remedy.". Does anyone think that Giffords would have been shot if she was NOT a Representative?

I'd like to hear from Tea Party people as to whether they feel that THIS "Second Amendment Remedy" was justified. If this one was not when would your "Second Amendment Remedy" be justified? When are you permitted to be "Armed and Dangerous"? When should you "Reload"? Who makes the call?

Loughner made his call, and used his "Second Amendent Remedy" to take out Gabriel Giffords. If this action was not appropriate, when is it appropriate? Who makes the call? Palin? Beck? Limbaugh? Who?

Exactly Tracy... Feel like saying to Palin and Angle,

"How's that second amendment remedy thingy workin' out for ya'"

I do not think that Palin's crosshairs ad caused Loughner to go on this shooting rampage.

Yes, but pulling down the "crosshairs" map doesn't help Palin's "I'm an innocent victim" message. If she were an "innocent victim" the crosshairs map would still be posted and she would stand behind it.

I do not think that Palin's crosshairs ad caused Loughner to go on this shooting rampage.

I think they were a major contributor. Dehumanizing people by making them "targets" is one way to foment violence.

In the Nazi regimes this was done with vile propaganda films that compared Jews to rats, among other things. In Rwanda similar dehumanizing language was used.

Conservatives have been using dehumanizing language on liberals for decades. We are socialists -- a term bastardized out of all recognition, or we are unamerican, we are destroying America, etcetera etcetera etcetera.

I'm done with it. When I see this language directed at me or mine I will call in a terrorist threat. I suggest all real Americans do the same.

Well said, Max.

I agree about the de-humanizing and when have our elected officials, or people running for office, EVER made so many violent threats against fellow Americans, or used so much gun rhetoric? I don't ever remember seeing that until Palin burst on the scene. Maybe it happened before I was born, but in my lifetime, I don't remember seeing guns in political ads like we've seen with the Teapublican party these past few years.

maximillio

I think Loughner is mentally ill, but please understand that I think Palin's ad was reprehensable. So was Angle's "Second Amendment Remedies", Beck ranting about the Tide's Foundation, etc. on and on and on it goes.

Pointing a finger at Palin and saying she is responsible for THIS act could come back to harm the larger dialouge that we all need to have.

I think the larger debate needs to be framed something like this,

Tea Party people you obviously don't think Loughner should be able to make the call for "Second Amendment Remedies" against the government to begin, but obviously from YOUR OWN WORDS you feel someone should be able to make the call. Who is that person? The rest of America wants to know.

Yes, but pulling down the "crosshairs" map doesn't help Palin's "I'm an innocent victim" message.

Agreed, Palin is anything but an innocent victim. However the discussion needs to be much broader than what amount of responsibility she should shoulder for Saturday's tragedy.

"If words don't work, bullets will." WHAT does that mean? What did they expect us to think? WHO were they speaking to?

It's reprehensible, but they are still defending it. The Tea Party uses Free Speech, much like the Wesboro Church members do. Disgusting.

Whether we like it or not, Republican, Democrat, right or left, when we all heard of the shooting, even before the Sheriff made his statement, the very first thought that went through most American heads must have been, "Oh my God, we have gone too far!" Otherwise this debate about "fiery" rhetoric would not be happening. I was suprised that even my husband, who will not discuss his politics and stays in the middle of the road thought this very thought.

The rhetoric has gone too far, even if it had no influence on what happened in Tucson. Even Palin thought that thought, otherwise she would have left her map up on her sarahpac site. Her lack of response and her words now prove that she has been scrambling to justify her actions. I see no leadership value in her.

Pointing a finger at Palin and saying she is responsible for THIS act could come back to harm the larger dialouge that we all need to have.

No, really I do not think so. Palin's rhetoric is beyond the pale. It needs to be denounced as hateful and an invitation to violence. It is time for the RIGHT WING TO DISARM, and to do so UNILATERALLY. There is not even a remote equivalent on the left for what is being said by Palin and her followers.

I'm not interested in a discussion with the right wing until this disarmament has happened. Period.

Where's all that condemnation for the Daily Kos also placing the crosshairs on Ms. Giffords? If crosshairs caused this, perhaps it was the more recent ones?

The Daily Kos should NOT be doing that either.

However, they are not our elected officials, nor were they actively running for office. Our leaders, or people who want to be our leaders, should not be encouraging the assassination of their opponents or their opponents' supporters.

Where's all that condemnation for the Daily Kos also placing the crosshairs on Ms. Giffords? If crosshairs caused this, perhaps it was the more recent ones?

DailyKos did not put Giffords in "cross-hairs" despite what your right wing source has told you. They did say that Giffords district should be targeted as one where there should be a primary challenge because they were unhappy with some of Gifford's votes.

You do understand that there are different definitions for the word target?

Rob - Show me the Daily Kos crosshairs.

Link?

I was referencing doing it specifically over her vote against Ms. Pelosi - quite recently. I've heard this discussed several times over the last few days by several folks from both sides of the aisle. I can't get to that site from work, and forgot to go try to find further discussion of it last night. I will do so at my earliest convenience.

Ms. Palin, as much as I can't stand her, placed crosshairs on several districts on a map of Arizona, correct? The one I have seen (with obvious crosshairs misrepresented as 'surveyor symbols') was white on blue...

I think Palin's ad was reprehensable.

You know the Democrats had an ad just like that one, right? And it's still up.

I have not heard people complaining that this map is dangerous, and honestly, I don't want to. No rational person thinks that either map is a call to go shoot someone.

So should we watch our mouths in case a crazy person is listening (and there's no evidence Loughner ever saw EITHER map)?

No! You can't start limiting what people say because a wacko might take it out of context and act on it. You can't do this because you never know what's going to set the crazy guy off. The guy who shot Reagan was obsessed with Jodie Foster in the movie Taxi Driver. Who could have seen THAT coming?? The guy who shot John Lennon was obsessed with "Catcher in the Rye." Should we ban "Catcher in the Rye?" Of course not, but some people wanted to. You just can't control everything.

I'm not interested in a discussion with the right wing until this disarmament has happened. Period.

Perhaphs I am not being clear. Palin is a SYMPTOM of a much larger problem. Palin is a small part of the problem (a foul, disgusting part, but small none the less). If we continue to focus on her it allows the rest of the offenders to slither off. Even if in the end this completely destroys Palin's media persona someone else will simply walk in and take her place.

The light need to shine on the entire cast of right wing nut bags

Let's talk about Beck's connection to the nut in California that was targeting the Tides Foundation. Or the connection between O'Rielly and the death of George Tiller. Let's look at the link between right-wing hate books and the Knoxville killer.

Unfortunately, even if we as a country can have this dialogue, only one group in the country can stop this nonsense....

The Republican Party. And it's going to take a mighty effort to make them give up what has helped them gain power.

The Republicans have to rise up against the Palins and Becks and say "Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

Pointing at Palin, focusing on just her, will not cast the net wide enough. In fact Limbuagh and Beck and the rest of the boys are happy to have the light on her. It hides their misdeeds. It allows them to create a tit-for-tat debate about "cross-hairs" that will very quickly cause the general public to tune out.

Palin is just one of the field generals, not the only one. The rest will sacrifice her if it allows them to continue, we can't let that happen.

Nobody has ever said it was the map alone. People, myself included, HAVE criticized the Democrats using similar maps. What we're saying is that if, for months on end, you make out our government official as enemies who need to be gunned down, you're acting profoundly irresponsible and encouraging lunatics to act on your words. Remember 'Tiller the Baby Killer'? He was targeted...and hit.

Can you explain what 'If words don't work, bullets will' is supposed to mean? Can you tell me who they were talking to and what they expected to gain from that? That's not speaking metaphorically, imo. That's just ONE example. There are many more. Too many more.

The culmination of violent rhetoric from the Teapublican party is disgusting and unnerving. These are not obscure people on the net we're talking about. These are people who were in office or running for office. And NONE of them...did it just once. They did not let up. Will they let up now?

maximillio

Posts 2.16, 2.17, 2.21

I rest my case.

Tax less, spend less, do less. That's what I believe in, and why I support the "Tea Party Movement". That's all the real movement concerns itself with. If you want to lump us in with the Christian fundamentalist whatever the hell is going on with the uber-fringes on the right wing - well, don't be surprised when you on the left are lumped in with anarchists, communists, and socialists.

That's the first step in the demonizing, polarizing, divisive language. Why doesn't the left get that? Hell, why doesn't the right for that matter?

Rob, where is a mainstream politician who is living that rhetoric and leading the TP? If you had a credible leader and party structure, folks might take you more seriously...

Rob, please see my response to your post on page two. (If interested.)

I accidentally posted it in the wrong place.

Hi Rob, do less? Hmm. Then do less, but please don't criticize us when we feel the need to do more. Taxes??? There lower now than in years. So your left with spending as your one disagreement, correct? Yes, demonizing, polarizing, divisive language needs to go; so may we expect to see big changes within the Tea party? Lets please start with no more tea party signs calling us socialists or signs of cartoons of the President wearing a turban or a Hitler mustache. There's a good place to start.

If anyone wants to attend a Democratic rally and burn the American flag (or a sitting President, aka George W. Bush) in effigy - personally, I do not see it as an indictment of all Democrats.

There is no unified party, it's a movement. That's part of what gives it strength, and also part of what gives it weakness. Were it to coalesce behind one person, it would have to take on that personality. I agree wholeheartedly that person has not yet materialized (and probably will not) - and all of the people that *have* materialized that *supposedly* "speak for the Tea Party" focus a lot less on the simple mantra of tax less, spend less, do less than they do on their fringe beliefs - that have no part of the mantra of the true "Tea Party Movement".

Do I decry the entire NAACP as racists because of the actions of Louis Farrakhan? Of course not. Even if the Nation of Islam showed up and started "killing whitey" at an NAACP rally, I would not blame the NAACP - I'd blame a bunch of extremists that are operating way outside the fringe and tried to hijack the movement for their own selfish reasons. Do I blame the totality of Islam for radical fundamentalists that flew planes into buildings? Of course not. Do I blame all Christians for Fred Phelps? Of course not.

And yes, Devon, I will look for it...:)

Do less. Yes. I can't think of a single Government agency off the top of my head that should be off limits.

Defense needs to be cut. We need to start realizing a return on our Education investment, or try something else. TSA/Homeland Security? Can't even begin to imagine how much needs to be cut there - after all, any agency created as a knee-jerk response to the darkest day I can recall in my lifetime is bound to have gone too far in imeplementation. Social programs? Some of those need Bill Clinton/Republican Congress style reform like Welfare did. There is a lot that can, could, and should be cut.

Rob, I do not see you as a tea party member judging from your response. Perhaps you are a real independent (not a Republican claiming to be one), they are few & far between, Bernie Sanders for instance, a good man & a true independent ...hmmm, maybe we'd all be better off with less labels?

Perhaps you are a real independent (not a Republican claiming to be one)

Exactly a discussion going on on several threads at the moment...lol I grew up a Republican, I went through part of my 20s as a Republican. At 40, I believe too strongly in civil rights for all people that have actually been born to profess to be one of those, I guess...lol.

At some point, the 40-60% of us "in the middle" are going to figure out that we can do without the extremes - from both sides...:)

Good luck : )

nica1829

I am sure she will make it all about her. That's is what is driving me crazy. The fact that with the tragedy that has happened somehow it all got turned around to put HER in the spotlight. I just don't get this country at times. Let's spotlight those that sacrificed life, those that behaved heroically and those that are fighting for their lives & leave the other blame game bull@!$%# in the schoolyard where it belongs. Since this shooting occurred & all the crap fall out I feel like we are on Willow Palin's FB page duking it out over some wardrobe faux pas. WHAT IS WRONG with people?

Force yourself to look away. There is NOTHING worthwhile to be found there.

Rob, at present it is a medusa movement with multiple heads that don't effectively communicate with each other. No credibility, which is why mainstream folk will not get on board. No clearly defined message apart from three vague talking points, Tax less, spend less, do less. {unless that results in a decrease in medicare... right?} Sorry, but I don't cast votes for talking points, nor do most americans. Obama was elected because he clearly stated what he thought needed changing and what changes he wanted to make. He is being demonized by the right wing for exactly that reason. He is working hard to make the changes he promised... When the TP has that kind of credibility, folks may get behind it.

A lot of Americans only cast votes for talking points, or worse yet vote with strict party loyalty regardless of who's in the race. We get a whole ton of people in the country extremely motivated (normally by fear), and then have a bunch of 53-47 elections - it's been that way as far as I can remember. Whether it's someone going after the votes of the elder population ("they will cut your social security, just watch"), the hispanic population ("punish your enemies", "best thing to do is don't vote"), or whoever - it's always fear. Evidently fear is a strong motivator.

President Obama was elected, IMO, because the country was sick of the policies of George W. Bush - partially as they were portrayed in the media (and everyone that chose to do so was relatively successful in portraying 4 years of McCain/Palin as basically being 4 more years of GWB). Anyone not willing to look back at the hatred and vitriol directed at our last President and see some of it as deliberately inflammatory and at some times skewed or distorted...well, IDK. It happened to Clinton. I don't remember it happening as much to George H. W. Bush, but there were certainly those who wanted to be "rid of Ronald Reagan at any cost".

I agree that the "Tea Party Movement" is probably going to not coalesce into a viable "third party" and be mainly a Congressional Caucus for the near future, if not ad infinitem. The people that have grabbed onto the reigns and are attempting to lead the Movement toward investigations and other reactionary legislation - they will probably be the ones falling by the wayside the next time they come up for re-election.

Let's hope.

The daily kos should not being doing that!! Ill even put little excamation points on it. Other thing is that some left wing pundits and reps have already apologized for things they have said in the past. Im not seeing the same condemation of their own actions from the right. Ita tough to discuss problems that we have in america when one large group will never admit theyve done anything wrong, even while condemn the same actions from a different group.

You know the Democrats had an ad just like that one, right? And it's still up.

Where? Show your work. You people are so lazy it astounds me. I don't know how many right-wingers show up, make BOLD assertions, and then claim they "don't know how" to post links, which is why they can't even be @!$%#ing bothered to put the raw http address in clear text.

Where's all that condemnation for the Daily Kos also placing the crosshairs on Ms. Giffords?

The DKos diary you mention was posted by one of the site's many pseudonymous visitors, and it was removed almost immediately and the diarist apologized profusely afterwards.

If one of Palin's followers, for example, had posted in some random place a similar sentiment it would be a lot less damning than Palin herself posting it as an advertisement and then coming back afterwards and trying to walk back the crosshair rhetoric (even though Palin HERSELF is on tape saying 'don't retreat -RELOAD' and a whole other raft of gun-related imagery).

See, there are FOLLOWERS who say stupid things on the left. There are LEADERS who say those things on the right. Do you understand the difference?

No they don't and they never will. Your anger is justified and appreciated.

I'm doing my weekly penance and am watching Glenn Beck as we speak. Rhetorical tolerance? Ha! It's fun to switch from him when he's at a hyperbolic peak immediately to Chris, who at least is speaking human- and back to Glenn, and his attempt at an Oscar, right into G Gordon Liddy doing an effective gold sales pitch for the deranged into The Scooter Store (call now!).

Glenn is yakking about a his personal "non-violence" pledge- "only 14 of them will sign this! Can you believe it! Only 14! I mean there's 500 left! (of course, those 500 have better things to do than listen to me, but) America! T-h-e-y w-i-l-l n-o-t sign!- and anybody trained in psychiatry would have him committed immediately.

We are so @!$%#ing disturbed

SH-2000...You wrote " Bernie Sanders for instance, a good man & a true independent ...hmmm, maybe we'd all be better off with less labels?"...

Bernie is an avowed socialst and sent out a newsletter talking about the shooting and asking supporters to keep making campaign contributions as he fears a tough challenge ahead, and had a link to his "donation page".....Mr. Wonderful

maximillio ...... Lots of captured screengrabs before they got a chance to scrub the websites:

http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/08/my-congresswoman-voted-against-nancy-pelosi-and-is-now-dead-to-me-eerie-daily-kos-hit-piece-on-gabrielle-giffords-just-two-days-before-assassination-attempt-on-her/

You asked for a link...here it is.

....it would be a lot less damning than Palin herself posting it as an advertisement and then coming back afterwards and trying to walk back the crosshair rhetoric....

But wait, wait!! haven't you heard? Those crosshairs weren't an image rifle scope, they were an image of a surveyor's instrument!! And she used a surveyor's instrument because...uh..gonna have to get back to you on that, but Sarah must have had a good reson. Or some kind of reason? Yep, sure she did.

Mike - OK, looked at your links. First the "Dead to me" comment came from a blogger posting on the Kos site, not from a Kos article, and they removed it. I wouldn't blame Newsvine for the the rightwing tripe I see here so regularly, same goes for the Kos site. Also "dead to me" is a dumb comment but not an incitement to action like Jesse's "remove Gabrielle, shoot an M16" brilliancy.

Second, the "Target" image was also dumb, but not nearly as incendiary as a rifle scope image. The target was not, I would point out, a target such as used on a shooting range, but more of a cartoon image. But the rifle scope image is just what you see when when you look through one.

So look, it's not like dumb comments or gun imagery is never used by Dems, and nobody is maintaining that Dems are 100% innocent there. But the heavy heavy majority of this crap has been coming from the Tea Party types and Sarah Palin in particular has used the rhetoric and the imagery whenever she saw advantage in doing so. Even though she proved on TV that she doesn't know a whole lot about shooting.

I grew up a Republican, I went through part of my 20s as a Republican. At 40, I believe too strongly in civil rights for all people that have actually been born to profess to be one of those, I guess.

And I'll bet you still vote Republican.

Not straight ticket, nope.

Can't recall ever doing that, honestly. It probably happened at some point, though.

If one is an independent - and one candidate running supports 60% of what the independent believes in, and the other candidate running supports 70% of what the independent believes in, that's who they pick.

If I ever find a candidate that supports 100% of what I believe in, I'm pinching myself.

*The only political anything in my office is an autographed picture of Senator Fred Thompson. I wrote him a letter in 1996 congratulating him for winning the TN Senate seat vacated by Al Gore, Jr. I asked him to run for President, as I recall.

Hey Trm, Happy New Year!

I think she is dumb but with a tad bit too much narcissism for her own good. Only explanation I can think of.

I did not hear James Clyburn state anything about censorship. I did hear a very short converstation about the fairness doctrine, and the way it was stated was to give the person who is demonized a chance to rebut. Hence the "fair" in fairness.

the right is all for PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY until it affects them. That and common sense.

Common sense tells one that spewing 24/7 that using bullets if ballots don't work and 2nd amendment remedies and to take up arms and to not retreat and to reload along with the other insane message out there day in and day out is just wrong and can have influence on a person.

Both sides need to just end it. 24/7 media penetration of hateful,vile,violent messaging is way out of hand.

notice how none of the right take this as anything but an attack on them.

people are dead and people like texasguy wants to use it as a chance to claim dems want to ban freespeech.

meanwhile they go ape@!$%# when a womans tit flashes on the tv for less than a second during something not many kids want to watch anyways.

They have been doing this crap since day one..

when we asked them to quit with the "terrorist fist jabs" they cried free speech.

when we asked them to chill with the whole "every single solitary muslim is a terrorists" they laughed and said free speech.

Now people are dead, and the right is still laughing saying "free speech"

notice how none of the right take this as anything but an attack on them.

And to the right so upset, I say that their self-identifying is verrrry interesting. Guilty minds?

It's like a kid who took a cookie before dinner. Mom and Dad might not mention his name, but the guilt eventually makes them yell: "ok, I'm sorry."

If you weren't mentioned and truly don't feel responsible, why the panic and wild spin?

What doe anybody know about the Fairness Doctrine? It is essentially forcing media outlets to censor their programming. It is directly aimed at censoring talk radio to remove as a political force to opposing the Marxist agenda of the Democrats. It opposes free speech as guaranteed in the Constitution and as a result needs to be stooped. As to keeping the public airwaves acceptable for children to watch I do not view that as censorship but as a responsible society protecting our most vulnerable. Children have a right to live and exist in this world. Free political speech is not. Our children are the ones who have the most difficult time already. At least for me I support a society and media that would let them grow up emotionally healthy.

As to keeping the public airwaves acceptable for children to watch I do not view that as censorship but as a responsible society protecting our most vulnerable. Children have a right to live and exist in this world. Free political speech is not. Our children are the ones who have the most difficult time already. At least for me I support a society and media that would let them grow up emotionally healthy.

So YOU DO understand that violent rhetoric can damage someone emotionally an d make them do bad things. Then you DO get that Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, etc.'s words can have consequences.

Bam! Well said bonos...

The human brain is not done developing until the mid twenties, so Loughner was still open to this influence...

Friedwatermellon:

Why don't you complain to Hollywood about their trashy Assassin movies and drug movies that keep the ghetto crime rates up.

Off-topic deflection, Fried. We're not talking about Hollywood's influence or "ghetto" crime. We're talking about political vitriol and the impact that it might have had upon a young, white, suburban assassin with obvious mental disorders.

make up your mind, fried. Either violence in the media influences people or it doesn't. If you are saying that those movies can influence people to commit violence, then you are admitting that Palin, Limbaugh, et al. are part of the problem.

Oh, and for the record, this trashy murderer didn't live in a ghetto.

Yep, the right wants to censor X, but not Y. If you oppose censoring Y, you just don't care about the influence of the media on young people..., if you suggest censoring X, you oppose freedom of speech...

Hypocrisy, thy name is GOP...

a political force to opposing the Marxist agenda of the Democrats

Really, does anyone take ridiculous crap like that seriously?

Assassin movies are probably what taught this nut case about the proper guns to use. I doubt he got that info from Palin.

I can hear it now - this is all Paul Giamatti's fault due to "Shoot 'em Up". "Mayhem Fest" on his notebooks - obviously heavy metal is to blame. Let's all boycott WalMart, they sold the ammo.

Come to think of it, he breathed on the morning of the senseless, tragic attack - so we all better stop doing that too.

smellitcoming

How about Gangsta Rap music that advocates rape, drug use, killing, killing law enforcement.............

DUH!!!! We have objected to it! I am a fierce democrat and liberal but I do not listen to gangsta rap nor do my friends. We like old school. Recently we saw a evian commercial with the background music being Rapper's Delight! WHOOO that brought back good memories! I also don't play Grand Theft Auto, won't let it be brought into our house, played on our system, I don't have firest person shooter games on my computers. Why? Because those are inappropriate for the most part.

So where exactly do you get the idea that the left supports this crap. We acknowledge that people have the disgusting right to produce this crap but we also know we have the right not to buy it.

I am a Democrat. Rap music and violent video games were never allowed in my house.

No exceptions. Ever.

I'm a democrat and I listen to rap music and play violent video games... Neither of which drive me to murder, Because they are NOT real!!!

Maybe we should outlaw Wylie coyote as well... Sarah, sharron, Michelle and company are real politicians who hold or ran for office... They have a responsibility to avoid such rhetoric... Comparing them to musicians or video games is a non starter...

I think it's time to get out the headphones and fire up the old school NWA, Ice-T, and Ice Cube. Maybe having it in the background will help with some perspective while filtering through most of this drivel.

notice how none of the right take this as anything but an attack on them.

That's exactly how it's been presented. How are they supposed to take it? It's not like people on Saturday were saying "gee the rhetoric from both parties is really a problem." They came right out and named names. Names like Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, Fox, etc. Everybody is all over the SarahPAC map, but the similar map put up by the Democratic Leadership Council was nearly identical. Even Obama talked about bringing a gun to the fight back in 2008 and called Republicans "the enemy" just this year.

Now I think the Right uses gun imagery more then the Left, but there is no monopoly on gun metaphors or aggressive political speak in general. The implication...no, the direct accusation has been that the Right is solely to blame for all of this. Why shouldn't the Right see it as an attack on them and their speech?

Before this happened, both Giffords and Judge Roll (and most of the progressives in this country) were, in fact, stating that the hateful rhetoric had been ratcheting up and needed to be reigned in... I'm sorry you missed that, but it was out there...

It was never represented as an attack on them until they claimed it was. Dupenik's first statement merely mentioned violent rhetoric. He didn't say right wing rhetoric. They took it as an attack and went off on the sheriff. Once they attacked him, he pointed out that those attacks are just the same kind of rhetoric that poisoned the atmosphere previously.

Your absolutely righ about Dupenik. He never made a reference to who he felt was responsible for this rhetoric.

The right wingers must feel real guilty about something or they are just pissed for not bringing it up first!

bonos_rama

Texasguy wrote:

As to keeping the public airwaves acceptable for children to watch I do not view that as censorship but as a responsible society protecting our most vulnerable. Children have a right to live and exist in this world. Free political speech is not. Our children are the ones who have the most difficult time already. At least for me I support a society and media that would let them grow up emotionally healthy.

So YOU DO understand that violent rhetoric can damage someone emotionally an d make them do bad things. Then you DO get that Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, etc.'s words can have consequences.

Sure he does. This is Texasguy you're quoting. He's got his r/w rants on hot keys. Making people do bad things is the reason he's here.

I'll just go ahead and say it:

Sarah Palin's chances for the Presidency are toast. She has hit her high mark [although I'd be hardpressed to say when THAT was...] and is now slipping and is not coming back.

Although I'm less sure of it, I wouldn't be surprised if the same turns out to be true for the Tea Party. The BS they have been flooding us with looks pretty bad right now.

Palin never had a chance to be POTUS, but now her 15 minutes of money grabbing fame are ending... Hope she banked some cash...

$12 million last year alone.

in the bank, or in gross (and I mean gross) earnings?

Clyburn, the Anti Gun Metaphor Congressman: Obama Had a ‘Double Barrel Effort’ Last Night. So who is it again that is intellectually unable to understand? ...Hell, he can't even keep up with his own bull@!$%# narrative.

OMFG, he actually said that. Seriously. I can't believe it...lmao

Who's the intellectual now, Mr. Clyburn?

dufus... plain and simple.

How many hours passed between him decrying the use of gun/ballistic metaphors in political discourse and his use of gun metaphors? Is his memory that compromised? Shouldn't we be concerned about his ability to represent his constituency considering his dramatic mental decline? He is a shameless clown.

Well, it certainly will be entertaining to see how Sarah Palin replies to this ;)

Colonial, why would anyone respond to this screed by Clyburn? Any self-respecting person would laugh privately to themselves and feel sorry for his medical condition: Rectal-Cranial Inversion.

I have a new theory - it's like when a referee makes a really really @!$%#ty call against Team A... And then, maybe the benefit of the doubt slides over to Team B the next time there is a close play - you know...a "make-up call".

This has gotta be Clyburn's "make-up call" for Ms. Palin...the extension of this olive branch will allow them to gracefully and peacefully co-found Dumbasses Anonymous in a bipartisan manner. In honor of skipping the frigging pep rally in Tuscon, Speaker Boehner is obviously in line for the first chapter presidency.

I mean - what's the alternative? sigh...

dufus... no one ever said the right wing has the corner on the market of stupid politicians...

in the bank, or in gross (and I mean gross) earnings?

she grossed $12 million. still though, she pocketed a lot of money.

well that's where you should be saying "that you never intended for anyone to take it literally"

Wow. That is precisely what she did say. If you watch the clips of her speeches, she gives that very disclaimer while she is using the metaphor. She made it clear that when she talks about being armed, she is talking about voting and not about guns or violence. She deserves credit for that - especially from people who say she should have done it. Because she did.

...after being confronted about it, NOT before... Easy to say you don't mean it, after the fact... Like saying it was surveyors sights, not gun sights... guess she wanted folks to reload their surveyors tape???

...after being confronted about it, NOT before... Easy to say you don't mean it, after the fact...

Well of course you say it after being confronted about it. Show me someone on either side who feels the need to explain their very ordinary metaphors? It doesn't generally happen. Did Obama feel it necessary to proactively explain that he wasn't actually going to physically kick someone in the butt over the BP oilspill?

Why do intelligent people like to pretend they're dumb just so they can make someone on the other side look violent? I'm quite sure Palin felt like any hysteria over that metaphor was contrived just for the sake of partisan drama and yet she offered up the disclaimer anyway. Wouldn't someone else have either ignored the complaint or belittled the complainer? Again: give a little credit where it is due.

ordinary metaphor... In politics, I don't think I've seen the gunsights before, nor the 'don't retreat- reload'. I don't think I've ever heard the '2nd amendment remedies' metaphor from the left wing, and if it were ordinary, wouldn't that be the case? Not ordinary metaphors at all... now, kicking butt... that is a very ordinary metaphor that you hear from across the political spectrum... and in all walks of life...

Hey Moose, you want to defend Palin, how about addressing post 1.28... seems you have ignored that issue completely...

I don't think I've seen the gunsights before

Well, these aren't gunsights, but will bulls' eyes do? This is a Democrat website:

The bottom line for me is that I'm simply not threatened by the gun metaphors. Until I see some sign that they are genuinely causing people to get shot, I see no reason to freak out over them. I get that they make a lot of Democrats uncomfortable, but they wouldn't be used if they didn't have some appeal.

This country - like it or not - won it's freedom with the power of guns. We tried simply demonstrating. That didn't work. Eighty years later, it took guns to end slavery. We tried compromise and debate, but that didn't work. It's in our history and for a lot of Americans, it's still in our culture. But MOST people don't go to the supermarket and shoot people. It's a metaphor and sane, intelligent people get that.

It's a metaphor and sane, intelligent people get that.

Sure....but it's the insane and/or stupid ones we have to worry about.

And we'll be worrying about them even if all guns, ammunition, knives, forks, cars, and political pundits are outlawed.

I'm no anti gun lefty...I have several and love each one of them.

I just wonder why righties feel that less regulation is going to stop something like what happened the other day??

Some schmo that happens to be armed starts taking pot-shots at the guy...then someone in the confusion starts taking pot-shots at THAT guy....then the authorities just see people having a gun battle in a safeway parking lot and can't tell who is who.

I don't know where my link keeps going, but it's of a map on the website for the Democratic Leadership Council. It looks just like Palin's, though it doesn't have names, and it's bulls' eyes instead of crosshairs. It's similar enough, though, to make the point. The map is titled "Targeting Strategy" and the caption begins, "Behind Enemy Lines."

www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253055&kaid=127&subid=171

something messed up here sorry

So remind me again of who got blown away off of the democrats list??

It's a metaphor and sane, intelligent people get that.

I believe I reflected that in this statement: Most people on the left or right would look at your map, some will think it's spot on as a way to rally the troops, some will look at it and think it's a little over the top......but one or two people who's minds aren't what they should be will look at it and think these are people you really want to take out.

Look I don't blame Sarah Palin for the shooting that is clearly on Jared L......but alot of cheap talk has been thrown around the past few years, especially during election season. Why can't a candidate say "We both want to do what we believe is best for "Hooterville"....My opponent believes train tracks should be on the left side of the street, in my opinion the train tracks should be on the right side of the street.....If that's what you believe vote for me, if then don't vote for me" There's really no reason whatsoever to demonize either side and why are we letting the 5% on the extremes talk for those of us who probably agree on 80% of the issues?

less regulation is going to stop something like what happened the other day

You won't hear that cry coming from here. For starters, those extremely high capacity clips should be immediately outlawed. Anyone that can't defend themselves with 10 in the mag and 1 in the pipe...well, I feel for them - but the Second Amendment probably wasn't going to help them to begin with.

Yeah freidmelonhead pretty much disqualified himself as any one worth listening too with using palin-intellectual in the same paragraph.Keep smokin that good stuff melon...keeeep smokin....

Considering Palin and her follows embrace anti-intellectualism, Clyburn is merely stating the obvious.

How is Palin anti-intellectual? She's not telling anyone to quit school. She's reacting to a prejudice expressed by Obama himself that conservatives are stupid. Remember Obama referring to the people who "cling to their guns and religion?" "City folk" love to talk about "small town folk" or "country folk" like they're morons.

It is exceedingly rare for anyone on the Left to acknowledge someone on the Right as a thoughtful, intelligent person with a different point of view. The rhetoric is always that the Right is too stupid, or that they hate people, or that they're racist. When people on the Right seem "anti-intellectual," this is the context from which this springs. No one likes to have their heartfelt philosophy dismissed as stupid, mean, or racist.

It is exceedingly rare for anyone on the Left to acknowledge someone on the Right as a thoughtful, intelligent person with a different point of view.

Like who???

One of many quotes from Palin about 'elite Ivy league education'...

And I believe that what Americans are seeking is not the elitism, the kind of a spineless -- a spinelessness that perhaps is made up for that with some kind of elite Ivy League education and a fat resume that's based on anything but hard work and private sector, free enterprise principles.

Ivy league educated folks are spineless and make up for it with their elite education and fat resume...

Nice... didn't know she had such feelings about GWBush... or his dad...

some kind of elite Ivy League education and a fat resume that's based on anything but hard work and private sector, free enterprise principles.

Wow, that does sound a lot like bush.

Like who???

That's sort of the point. It's not up to me to come up with a conservative who is intelligent, not-hateful, and not-racist. It's up to you. I would ask you if there is anyone that fits that description for you. If not, then do you not see how partisan that is? Do you not see how conservatives would then feel like they are being dismissed out-of-hand?

Your judgment of someone as hateful, fear-mongering, racist, and so on means nothing if that is how you judge everyone who disagrees with you.

Put another way: Is it possible to support conservative ideals like individual freedom, less (not zero) government intrusion, free or minimally regulated markets, lowest possible taxes, etc. without being racist, fearful, or stupid?

I'm an intelligent, educated person who supports those ideals. I do not hate people of color, the poor, the hungry, the elderly, immigrants, or anyone else.

so, you have no suggestion of a conservative who is intelligent, not-hateful, and not-racist. ... I'd say that Lugar of Indiana is an excellent example. Unfortunately he is too moderate to get any recognition form the current GOP.

Also, no response to Palin's obvious anti-intellectual statements... nice. keep spewing crap MrMoose

I don't care about who is a republican...I'm not going to go searching for the one I agree with...I would say it is up to them to make themselves known.....not for me to "discover".

who is intelligent, not-hateful, and not-racist.

I can think of a couple of dems off hand. Number one would be one of my state's reps...Jim McDermott. Another one would be Howard Dean. Dean would be great to have come back around...with the nonsense we have been through in the last 2 years Dean seems pretty normal.

As far as conservatives go....thats a hard one.....I would say Ron Paul....but he's not really a conservative, generally speaking....and his son is a douche bag.

Marty Moose, when Palin lies, and her followers approve, applaud, and repeat that lie as if were the gospel truth, THAT is embracing anti-intellectualism. It serves no purpose other than it contributes to the dumbing down of her constituency. The more she does it, the more dumbed down they get, and also the more SHE does it, the more dumbed down SHE gets, because she starts to believe her own false rhetoric based on the feedback she is getting from her followers.

because she starts to believe her own false rhetoric based on the feedback she is getting from her followers.

I am virtually positive this happens to folks in both parties. I remember a lot of folks in the Democratic leadership who drank a lot of funny Kool Aid and were stating that they had a good chance of keeping the House right before the last election.

I definitely agree in the case of Ms. Palin though. Based upon what I've seen the past few days and some of her extremist supporters, it's one of those closed circuits.

You show me PROOF that Palin is responsible. When Clyburn makes the kinds of statements that he does, he's no better.

Fueling hate.

Fueling hate? He said she doesn't seem to know what's going on... I agree with him, but where is the hate?

Do I need to speak slower? Clyburn is just ginning up more hatred for Palin.

It Aint So: Rep. Clyburn doesn't need to gin up hate here; Palin is doing it very well all by herself. Rep. Clyburn was kind and articulate, gently interpreting her remarks. I'd say he treated her like the intellectual deficient person that she is.

Yep, RBW, no hate in his speech at all, but IAS can't tell the difference... Therein lies the problem...

Maybe in your world..

Yes, in the real world (ie not the GOP-verse), when one is asked for proof, the proper answer is to supply it not to say "NO! You prove it first!"

love it.................

And I have a 7 year old with more sense that any far left loon here on newsvine that thinks that this tragedy gives them license to make any outrageous and slanderous remark that pops into their gourd.

Sorry, Sarah, that won't work anymore.

But of course it works. There are numerous examples right here in this thread alone. Throughout NV the past couple days it would probably be impossible to count the number of posts defending her (and the rest). The posters may be the usual suspects, but there they are, falling for the victimization line and defending it.

----------

FoolsGladly

But notice it is just the usual suspects (and I have even seen some hardcore conservatives here speaking against her). Palin needs moderates and those outside the teabag fringe to support her and she is pushing them further away with every word.

Palin's new book is barely selling, the paperback of her first book is being returned to the publisher for lack of sales, her show was not renewed, now this. She's hit the skids. Hope she saved/invested some of her money, the faucet might be slowing down greatly.

TJG -

Agree, every word.

----------

FoolsGladly

TheJonesGirl

Palin's new book is barely selling, the paperback of her first book is being returned to the publisher for lack of sales, her show was not renewed, now this. She's hit the skids. Hope she saved/invested some of her money, the faucet might be slowing down greatly.

It's like a trainwreck. Now all we have to do is resist the temptation to look.

It's like a trainwreck. Now all we have to do is resist the temptation to look.

No way...after being bombarded with this woman since McCain dug her out of obscurity, I am going to watch the wreck and laugh the whole time.

...he and Squidward are a couple seeking a gay marriage

They aren't? ;-)

No , I think Spongebob has a thing for Patrick.

: )

Crabs is a Republican for sure.

and plankton is a shoe in for Boehner...

Nonsense. Plankton is green, Boehner is orange.

Krabs IS red, though. He also likes to work his employees all day without pay.

Mental illness strikes one in five adults in the U.S. , and I don't think we have 90 Million depraved people. People with mental illnesses cannot help who they are, and are often taken advantage of, bullied , mistreated and ostracized.

The difference between them and Loughner is that many of those people seek the little treatment that is available out there for the mentally ill.

It's a slap in the face to those who are productive members of society to label them that way.

I suffer from Vietnam PTSD myself. I'm not depraved , and I go to the VA regularly for treatment with counseling and medication if needed. I'm a little radical , but hardly depraved.

I shared that with you and others on Newsvine as most know that I am a rational and highly functioning member of society who happens to suffer from wartime stress disorder , a mental disorder.

I'm a little strange, highly creative ( I write screenplays and compose music ) but hardly depraved.

JaiAllen

Do you read what you post? Read your own post carefully..then get back.

The mental illness Loughner suffers from does relate to 1 in 5.

Read Mental Health and Illness - How Many People Are Mentally Ill?

ahhh, but JaiAllen, IV will say he wasn't talking about people like you that have "mental issue" but you know the "raving lunatics" that we can all pick out of a crowd. The ones foaming at the mouth like the shooter was... <sarc>

But YOU said depraved individuals. 1 in 5 are mentally ill, but they aren't necessarily depraved. Abraham Lincoln was mentally ill, but was he depraved ?

Only to those seeking to derail freedom was he depraved, to many, he was a man who functioned well with a mental illness and became the Greatest Man to hold that office.

Your attempt to link mental illness and depravity was off the mark. There's no connection between the two. There are depraved people who aren't necessarily mentally ill and vice versa.

Jared Loughner is an evil man who committed a crime that cost innocent people their lives, and his actions are directly the result of a mental instability that afflicts only the most depraved of our species.

There's close to 60 million bi-polar and 10 million paranoid schizophrenics in America. Many manage their illness without resorting to Loughner like tactics.

There's no concrete evidence that Loughner was mentally ill, it appears that way , but there's no psychological or medical proof that he was.

Neither Oswald , Sirhan Sirhan nor John Wilkes Booth were considered mentally ill , they were all just extreme radicals who took their political ideology to the ultimate.

The murderer was using "legal" hallucinogens...no mental illness, except his self-imposed one.

JaiAllen

Okay..you make a good point. If a person is depraved does not necessarily mean they are mentally ill. I can accept that premise.

IndependentVoter

What is there to get?

Jared Loughner is an evil man who committed a crime that cost innocent people their lives, and his actions are directly the result of a mental instability that afflicts only the most depraved of our species.

It is not rocket science.

How come no one is mentioning the refusal of ultra-conservative Arizona taxpayers to provide an adequate level of service for those who are clearly mentally ill? (Or much of anything else, if the truth be told.)

We're talking about a state that consistently scores among the worst worldwide in student academic achievement - a state whose young are so unprepared for employment that the governor sees them as candidates for the agrarian jobs now filled by immigrants - a state whose mentally ill roam the streets.

Loughner isn't evil. He's a mentally ill young man, unprepared for gainful employment, unable to find help - who's listened to too many nuts on late-night radio. Tune in yourself, and you'll see. Here's a clue: "Conscious dreaming".

Just Nelli,

How come no one is mentioning the refusal of ultra-conservative Arizona taxpayers to provide an adequate level of service for those who are clearly mentally ill?

Excellent, excellent point!

Furthermore, why was Loughner allowed to participate in Tuscon City Prosecutor's diversion program?

Twice.

In October 2007, Loughner was cited in Pima County for possession of drug paraphernalia, which was dismissed after he completed a diversion program, according to online records.

A year later he was charged with an unknown "local charge" in Marana near Tucson. That charge was also dismissed following the completion of a diversion program in March 2009, the Daily Star reported.

I have to ask. What were the ramifications from his participation in Tuscon's government diversion programs? Which expunged his police records from public view, and subsequently created significant gap in his background check when he purchased a firearm.

We know the ramifications were deadly.

mentally ill young man

Yet to be determined.

listened to too many nuts on late-night radio

No evidence that happened...you are making stuff up....

clearly mentally ill

Then where were his parents..in a coma?

Diversion Program

Your charges will be dismissed.

You will be given a total of ONE HUNDRED (100) days to SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE the diversion program including the payment of all fees and any court ordered restitution owed to the victim.

Did not work for him....twice.

IndependentVoter

mentally ill young man

Yet to be determined.

That this conclusion has been reached more than once is clear from excerpts from his record already quoted. Not to mention that his fellow students asked that he be excluded from class because he was "scary" and they were scared he'd bring a gun to school and start shooting.

listened to too many nuts on late-night radio

No evidence that happened...you are making stuff up....

Late night talk and Patriot meetings are about the only places he'd be exposed to the idea of "conscious dreaming" without actually seeing it in print. (He refers to it as "conscience dreaming".) It involves tuning into your "dreams" and enacting them as indistinguishable from external reality - probably not a practice that brings out the best in those subject to paranoid delusions.

clearly mentally ill

Then where were his parents..in a coma?

You believe his parents are the ones to take sole responsibility? So do many Arizonans.

That's probably because Palin had no part in writing it.

Every speech she gives is so wordy...it's like she throws in extra words (even where they aren't needed) to sound what she precedes to be smarter. Pontificator extraordinaire, she'd use Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious in a sentence if she thought it sounded good.

Every speech she gives is so wordy.

She reminds me of a kid who throws in extra, unneeded words just to meet a page requirement for the assignment--the type that would spell out "United States of America" when USA would suffice.

TheJonesGirl

She reminds me of a kid who throws in extra, unneeded words just to meet a page requirement for the assignment--the type that would spell out "United States of America" when USA would suffice.

Considering the source, that is probably one of the most amusing things I believe I have ever read posted by any Liberal.

All she ever does is react to the issue of the day and every reaction is filled with smug, nasty, bigoted and hatefull rthetoric - the red meat her folowers love to devour!

Post one.

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

####

How's that for elevating the healthcare debate?
This is exactly what the Congressman is talking about. She is ignorant and hate appears to be the only way for hetr to express herself.

"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit and these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard-working, very patriotic, very pro-America areas of this great nation," Palin told a campaign rally in North Carolina in mid-October.

I was born and bred in NYC, so I'm not pro America?? That is hateful...

Sarah is an American. She is like most of us (opportunistic), she just happens to be more visible. Before we continue to attack other people remember the words from the greatest man whom came from the greatest woman among us "Let he whom is without sin cast the first stone." The rider and the very horse being ridden were prideful and pompous as they pranced and dance across the burning fields of the divided land, neither caring to acknowledge the stench of burring flesh nor the wails of women and children begging for mercy as they were slaughtered enmass. At some point we will have to put away the vicious hammer of blame with scourcing malice and began to rebuild America from within ourselves FIRST, or we will not have a decent America to live in. We can start this very moment. Doing that is more important than feeding our petty egos, don't ya think... Americans?

Not according to saint Sarah... Right? Her statement is right out of McCarthyism, and that WAS hateful...

El mar, Jesus. Really? You're gonna play the Jesus card... Gag!

TheyreAllCrooks
Matthew-480753

You are right....how dare she express an opinion contrary to yours! Outrageous ! Disagree with Obama ! Inexcusable....Like little towns rather than large cities ! Again... outrageous! She might even have a different favorite color........

LOL

M.Bachman is equally as toxic.

IndependentVoter

Nobody is challenging her right to have express her opinion.

But it makes no sense for so-called leaders to constanly use the demeaning, violent and racist language that she uses.

Now she's got her toads all over TV telling us those were "surveyor scopes" not "crosshairs"...

Oh really, if they're "surveyor scopes" why did you take them off your web site?
And why were you constantly saying "don't retreat-reload" AFTER they were put on your site in the first place?

So, IV, you agree that because I'm from a big city, that I am not a true American? And you suggest that demeaning some Americans because of where they live is not hateful?

She was running to be VP for all Americans, not just her version of 'real Americans'...

She didn't say she preferred small towns, she said that real pro-Americans are found in small towns... That basically denigrates anyone not from a small town ...

Sarah Palin is a media invented entity and nothing more, there is no substance to her what-so-ever from her lack of intellect right down to her obvious lack of hunting, fishing and general outdoor acumen. She is a four star phony, but on the other hand, that seems to be the type of leader the American people want these days. In the modern parlance, "Just Sayin"

racist language

What racist language as Palin used?

that seems to be the type of leader the American people want these days

Correct..Obama was elected...and empty suit.

That was my point Independent Voter

Well when Sarah Palin addresses lilly white audiences and refers to them as "real Americans" from the "pro America parts of the country"...

And in the next breath refers to Mr Obama as a "domestic terrorist" and "un American"...I'd say that is defintiely playing the race card...

She's being doing just that every since McCain plucked her from obscurity and made her a household name.

I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,I mean, that's a storybook, man."

Mr. Obama could become the country's first black president because he was "light-skinned" and had "no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

But of course those statementst are not racist....correct?

Those certainly are racist words from Democrat Harry Reid.

But Harry Reid apparently is NOT the idiot that Palin is. And I do believe Mr Reid apologized. When has Sarah Palin apologized for any of the countless insults she's hurled at Obama and others?

She does this so often it's hard to keep track of what she says.
Not only that, she never accepts responsibility for her words or actions - she always blames someone else and makles excuses - just like to day she blamed the media.

Defend Palin all you like IV, but most Americans have figured out that Palin is nothing more than an opportunitst and a gold digger!

So, IV, you agree that because I'm from a big city, that I am not a true American?

Never said that..you are as delusional as Palin.

And you suggest that demeaning some Americans because of where they live is not hateful?

No

real pro-Americans are found in small towns

They are...and they are found in large towns and cities..

That basically denigrates anyone not from a small town ...

Only in your hyper-sensitive paranoid mind. Maybe you should seek help.

Those certainly are racist words from Democrat Harry Reid.

Actually the first quote is from the now Vice-President of the United States Joseph Biden when running for President. An apology is okay...well I understand now if a Democaratic Senate Majority Leader apologizes and the VP apologizes for being racists, and Sheets Byrd can use the N word on national television and apologizes it is all good.....However, if Trent Lott says a racist remark then he should have to resign immediately that is correct? Yes....double standard nonsense.

Don't try to put words in my mouth.

Whatever Biden or Lott or Reid said at least they all had enough class and dignity to at least fake an apology. Sarah Palin hasn't apologized for anything she's said or done...she simply blames others for the fire she started!

Sarah Palin has one goal - score as many political points as possible and leave carnage behind no matter what.

All she does is name call and slime....she hasn't added anything constructive or positive to any policy debate since McCain farted her onto the national scene.

Palin IMO is the most disgracefull and classless person in American politics and that's a tough title to hold when you have infected maggots like Newt Gingrich crawling around!

Nice dodge..but the double standard still exists...

BTW I blame the shooter....

BTW I would not vote for Palin under any circimstances.

There's hope...

Pretty darned good introspective post El Marr! I like the I'm hungry so I move toward food, I'm cold so I move toward warmth thingy!

Well said.

This, I also could not agree more with...:)

AMEN. May she just go away......

Yeah, and maybe she can lose that affected Alaskan native accent while she's at it! What a joke!

If she were you would have heard her touting that all over the place and you haven't ever heard it.

Her husband is part Inupiat Eskimo, perhaps that is where you got your misinformation? As you rednecks like to say Lets see the birth certificate!

Why should she, and she is part American Indian

i haven't heard that. todd is part inuit though, as someone has suggested.