Linus:

Yes, her map did have a target on Giffords' district. At the time, I wondered what would be her reaction if anyone on that list was actually shot at. Now we know (FWIW, her reaction is about what I expected it to be). It is interesting that on her FB page (now scrubbed) she boasted about the map and how 18 of 20 the Democrats targeted (her words) were defeated. One of the two who weren't is now in an Arizona hospital.

She will continue to say "I never said go shoot someone" and she will continue to be right. She never said those words. It doesn't change the fact that she has said (not implied but said) that the American government in its current incarnation is tyrannical and she has applauded (and mindlessly aped) the Jefferson quote that the 'tree of liberty must, from time to time, be watered with the blood of tyrants'. Now, is she responsible? No. But she should tone down her rhetoric.

Cheers
Aj

You've gotten to pause and wonder when stuff like this happen: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_808116.html


Me personally. I smell racism here but that's just my weird Canuckian view.


Oh.. and what does "RINO" mean? The only "RINO" I heard of was the Rhino Party of Canada (who favoured parties -- like "Party on, dude!" parties -- and weed as their platform)

What I'm wondering is how anyone can see the violent murder of 6 people, including a chief judge and a 9 year old girl, as "inconsequential".

Yes, exactly. She is right in the same way that Christine O'Donnell was right when she said that "separation of church and state" isn't in the Constitution.

I mean SURE that exact phrase isn't in there, but, well.

It's all bullshit and semantics.

Maybe I'm reading you wrong, hopes for clarification
 

Can you clarify something?

Do you honestly think the death if 6 people as inconsequential??

What do you mean by this??

Without having to look it up I presume it means Republican In Name Only.

I believe Kobi said the attacker was inconsequential, not the victims. But I could be mistaken.

I'm not misreading, Kobi called her an inconsequential politician.

What devalued her??

Now please give me the benefit of the doubt by not assuming I just pull info out of my ass.

I read her post 3 times before deciding to hit submit.

Snow already said it but, yeah. There is a person, laying in a hospital bed with half of her skull missing. She has a husband and family and, up until a few days, a whole life that she led. Now, through no fault of her own, she doesn't.

Personally, I find the word "inconsequential", used in the context of any person, to be offensive.

i read kobi as saying "inconsequential politician", like saying someone is an "ineffecual leader". describes the job, not the person. just 'cause you're a crappy field goal kicker doesn't mean you're a crappy person.

Ah.. I didn't see that first one. My apologies.

Yep. It's a derogatory and implies that the person isn't conservative enough.

Bears repeating.

[/QUOTE]

I hadn't made that association. Now I see it. Good point!

What Palin's video said to me today was total lack of leadership and insight. Compare what she said to the amazing speech Obama gave tonight (hey, there's the guy I voted for! Nice to have him back.). Obama is in another galaxy compared to where she is on the simple issue of leadership.

Jake

This is back from 2008, right after the Republican convention when Palin accepted the VP nomination. I love Matt Taibbi.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...palin-20100405

I love the part about what the images of Palin and Obama stand for. Honestly, when is the Democratic Party going to stand up and say, "Hey, you know what? Intelligence isn't just for the elite. It's for everyone. It should be a value we strive for here in America." God, why does the party let the Republicans use intelligence as a way to insult Obama? I don't get that.

Yes, precisely. Agree with the agenda or not (and it's no secret I disagree with it), one can only marvel at the slick propaganda machine that is the modern American conservative movement. It is a marvel to behold if one has any appreciation for the Machiavellian. That dark part of me has an appreciation for well-executed memetic manipulation. What is even more fantastic, and the part that I think both the American media and ordinary citizens should expect to be judged rather harshly on this score, is that they have gotten away with it. Christine O'Donnell is a perfect example.

As you point out, she's technically correct the words 'separation of Church and State' do not appear in the First Amendment. However, any ordinary understanding of the amendment--certainly in common parlance--understands that the language does, in fact, separate the authority of the State and the wishes of the Church and vice versa. If anyone harps on it, Ms O'Donnell can then go on FOX News and run the "liberal elites think they know better than the American people". If it's dropped, she looks like she won. Like I said above, masterful stuff. Now, did Ms O'Donnell come up with this strategy? Not hardly! This has an old provenance on both the Right and the Left because it works. At present it is the Right that has mastered the game.

Remember Ms O'Donnell is a product of the movement that gave us this:

"The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
(Anonymous aide to George W. Bush* as quoted by Ron Suskind in The New Yorker--2004)

Cheers
Aj