Political hate speech and consequences

Earlier today I posted information about the Arizona shooter Jared Loughner. There has been a rush to judgment by many on the right and left. The left quick to decide that Loughner is a Tea Party member, the right claiming the shootings were not political, etc.

We don’t know exactly what inspired Loughner to go on a shooting rampage. I hardly think it is reasonable to say it wasn’t politically motivated……one usually doesn’t lash out at politicians over the color of their hair or for personal reasons. The shooting of a politician is a political statement.

There are many rumors making the rounds on the internet including the rumor that Loughner is a liberal left winger. I don’t put much credence in that statement given the fact that his writings indicate a deep anger and distrust of everything government and his use of terms usually associated with Libertarians or conservatives. However, whatever he is, his actions have prompted many discussions about the tone of politics in this country, especially from people like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.

A number of months ago Palin came under attack for her use of a map with crosshairs over a number of states and a ‘hit list’ of 20 Congressional seats she wanted to ‘take back.’  Gabrielle Giffords was on that list.  Her inclusion on the list has caused some to blame Palin for the shooting and while I won’t go that far I will say that the tenor of political speech in this country has become incendiary.

Click to enlarge

Oddly enough Giffords made this comment about Palin’s map:

“Sarah Palin has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district and when people do that, they’ve gotta realize there are consequences to that action.”

Was the shooting a consequence of Palin’s actions? We won’t know unless and until Loughner enlightens us about his motivation and inspiration for his actions, BUT whether or not Loughner is a Palin fan or a Beck fan or a Limbaugh fan is immaterial. This should be a wake up call to them that their speech, their actions are unacceptable. I don’t care what side of the aisle you are on, it is time for us all to speak out and condemn the craziness that has been going on in this country.

Just the fact that there is some question as to whether or not the actions of a so called political leader inspired someone to commit such an action should tell us things have gone too far. Sarah Palin’s lackeys have spent a lot of time today scrubbing her website of some of her outrageous speech……why is that? If she truly feels that what she did with that map is okay why the rush to scrub it from the web?

Can you imagine the outrage from Palin and conservatives if a map of Alaska had a crosshair over Wasilla? We would have heard the whining, crying and screaming for days on end.

I’ve made no secret of the fact that I dislike Palin. The reasons I dislike her are many, not least of which is that her comments about death panels and a map with crosshairs on it is over-the-top irresponsible and borders on criminal. It’s time for the media to call her on her outrageous comments and time for her to go home to Alaska and leave politics to adults who understand consequences.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Political hate speech and consequences

  1. skyagunsta says:

    Sage, I seem to remember that sometimes Sarah Palin sounds as disjointed or disconnected in some of her speeches as this guy seems to be in some of his messages. And if I remember correctly one such example of her disjointed talk comes in that speech when she announced that she was resigning from Gov. of Alaska…

    Sage Reply:

    True. She’s been said to talk and write in word salads. She just tosses a bunch of them together and hopes they make sense. :-)

  2. AliSilver says:

    Im going to have to go with ‘all the language in the world would not have changed this guy’s actions’ because when you hear he asked a question like ” what is govnernment,, if words have no meaning’?? , then you can see he’s not playing with a full deck and there is no way for everyone on earth to be able to NOT say something that would set off a LUNATIC when he’s a ticking time bomb. After hearing more about the congresswoman I can’t see why anyone , dem or rep, would be TOO upset with her. She seems VERY middle of the road from what I’ve heard . Shes a miracle so far and I’m thinking if she makes it and it fully recovered and regains all her faculties that SHE might just be the first woman president ! What say you guys ?

    Sage Reply:

    I guess we will find out more about Loughner as times goes on. The FBI is now in charge of the federal case. There will be state charges as well.

    I don’t really know a lot about Giffords. The rest of her career will depend on whether or not she has any brain damage.

    timesr Reply:


    Its true, you never know what will set off a schizophrenic (most are not dangerous to others, BTW).

    Words do have meaning. Though I wouldn’t pass laws restricting “free speech”, I wouldn’t be inclined to vote for someone that used violent imagery against his opposition either. IMHO, that kind of reckless use of language is not a characteristic I admire.

    A bay area Congresswoman, Jackie Speier, was shot five times and left for dead in an attack that killed her boss Leo Ryan. They had flown to Guyana to investigate charges of abuse at Jonestown.

    AliSilver Reply:

    @timesr, It’s kinda like blaming Charles Mansons’ drug dealer for the killings… i mean Manson is clearly NOT WELL. No amount of good or bad talk would sway him. That’s how I see it .

    Sage Reply:

    I think none of us know for sure how much someone, anyone, whether mentally challenged or not, is swayed by the talk that they listen to. Whether or not Palin’s map had any influence on Loughner is immaterial to me. The point is the hate talk, the use of violent images, language and rhetoric needs to stop. Who knows who it might influence and what might come of it.

  3. AliSilver says:

    total run on sentence, sorry

  4. Anonymous says:

    He is obsessive. Rhetoric just fanned his disappointment in Gifford.

  5. AliSilver says:

    He was a truther too? :O

  6. skyagunsta says:

    The point is, I think, how much of SP’s incendiary map and rhetoric had an effect on settinf off the lunatic. I think she, Beck, Limbaygh and others should be held responsible for the kind of incendiary talk they put out there. Someone in another site has said that she, “should be charged in court with accessory to murder as a public figure who purposesly incites violence.” I happen to agree with that statement. Unless Palin is as crazy as the shooter is, she knows darn well that what she was saying was/is dangerous and that it would have consequences … as it in fact did. Perhaps she will also use the crazy defense of her self, “O, I am sorry, I didn’t know what I was doing … because I was not based on reality…” on her own behalf.

  7. Anonymous says:

    It’s a perfect opportunity for the conversation about the rhetoric. It definately shook up some of those in office. Haven’t heard much from those who actually used the rhetoric. Pat Bucannan (Sp?) backed off his revolutionary spiel on air and said it was time to quit it.
    IF everyone was honest about their initial thoughts right after this happened, they would admit that they thought the vitrol had finally caught up with it.

    Sage Reply:

    Hey Wizcon…I agree. If we don’t have this discussion now, then when? It’s time for it to stop and I applaud Sheriff Dupnik for keeping the focus on it. I have a post to put up about Dupnik calling out Limbaugh. Limbaugh has actually called for liberals to be killed and he should have been fired for it.

Comments are closed.