Would we like it if President Obama Directly blamed Sarah Palin for causing the Giffords shooting.

[dkf]

And then we find out Loughner has been obsessed with Giffords since 2007 and Obama has to eat his words?

Why are we not interested in being careful with our words also?

[RandySF]

1. Every M$M outlet would condemn him.

And Palin would present herself as a martyr.

[Drale]

2. He should call her out on all the hate she spreads

without directly mentioning the tragedy.

[dkf]

3. Which is what we should do.

[RainDog]

4. He is not going to do that because of his position

however, since Giffords herself indicated a concern with Palin's tactics, I think it's fair to question Palin's fitness as a national figure in view of the actions of yesterday.

If he was obsessed with her since 2007, what put him over the top and made him carry out his actions? in the court of public opinion, it is fair to speculate that the current political climate helped to move him from ideation to action - and the reason it is fair is that this is the response to such inflammatory political rhetoric - the flip side.

Palin deserves all the criticism she is getting because of her own choices to create the politics of hate as a way to make money.

[robinlynne]

10. not only that. of the 20 races in Palin's sites, only 2 Dems won. Giffords was one of them.

I hope the other has protection now.

[dkf]

He was kicked out of college since and could have fallen deeper into mental illness.

[RainDog]

19. true. too bad Palin tried to use scare tactics to prevent mental health care (i.e. HCR)

because, while most people with mental illness are not violent and do not engage in acts of violence, those who are provoked to do so by inflammatory and eliminationist rhetoric would be better off if they had health care to protect themselves from themselves and to protect other members of society - like 9-year-old children in the line of fire.

it would be irony if a right winger had been assassinated by a mentally ill person because this nation refuses to fund health care for needy individuals. with the murder of 6 and the attempted assassination of someone who, in spite of her more moderate leanings, saw the need for health care - it's simply tragic.

[dkf]

21. Now that is a legitimate criticism.

How many of these college shootings must we go through and now this? We need a better approach.

[RainDog]

23. it's not just about "college shootings." c.f. a study about political rhetoric and violence

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x156335

This is from a paper published by a PhD candidate at University of Michigan that was published on Sept. 15, 2010, that looks specifically at the current political rhetoric (i.e. the study USES the political rhetoric of Palin and the tea baggers) and the increase likelihood of violence.

Recently, the furor surrounding the national healthcare debate – beginning with raucous town hall meetings in August 2009 and culminating in the bill’s passage in March 2010 – led to a spike in death threats against public officials and smashed windows in Congressional offices; someone even cut the gas line at a house thought to belong to a Congressman after the wrong address was posted on a hostile website (Hulse 3/25/10). Another man wrote an anti-government suicide note before flying a small plane into a Texas IRS building, killing himself and one employee (Brick 2/18/10).

...One leader posted a map on Facebook with rifle cross-hairs on the districts of lawmakers who voted for the bill, alongside their names (Palin 3/23/2010a), and later added a Twitter post saying, “Don’t Retreat – Instead, RELOAD!” (Palin 3/23/2010b). At least four of the “targeted” members of Congress received death threats or had their offices vandalized with bricks thrown through their windows (that includes Giffords)...And in the early months of 2010, with the acrimony surrounding the health care debate, the Senate Sergeant of Arms reported a 300-percent increase in threats against members of Congress (Lovley 5/25/10). This conjunction of opposition politicians encouraging hostile crowds and the outbreak of death threats and vandalism led some commentators to ask whether political leaders were partly to blame for the violence and threats (Rich 3/27/10).3

......support for violence provides a direct measure of a citizen’s willingness to contribute to an atmosphere that encourages political violence by others. Although violent offenders are ultimately responsible for their crimes, the likelihood of violent acts may increase when political leaders and other citizens give voice to violent feelings toward government or fail to denounce the expression of violent attitudes. Even when most leaders and citizens may ultimately restrain themselves from committing violent political acts, a tolerant atmosphere toward political violence may encourage others with less restraint to act.

...This work suggests that political leaders regularly mobilize aggressive responses in audiences. Given the important state goal of minimizing aggression in society, the role of political leaders in stoking aggressive responses in citizens may be of some concern. There is a dark irony in this hidden conflict of interests. But whatever positive effects leaders seek when employing violent metaphors – whether support for themselves, for policies, or for political mobilization – are offset by the implications of violent language for political violence support. These mild rhetorical devices push some citizens to a level of hostility in which they openly wish physical harm on political leaders, contravening vital norms that enable democratic government to function. Yet it is difficult to imagine a workable solution for addressing this problem with constitutionally-protected speech, beyond self-restraint by leaders. The evidence here might be sufficient to make political leaders think twice before infusing violent language into speeches and ads, particularly in situations when their audiences are already boiling over with hostility.

The study looked at some of the less extremist modes of hate speech, not even the most teabaggery sorts.

[tnvoter]

5. obsessed with her since 2007, why?

why would he be obsessed with her?

this was a political assassination. he disagreed with her. he killed her. I don't understand why that's so hard for some people on this board to digest.

[dkf]

8. There was a 2007 letter from Giffords in his safe...addressed to a misspelling of his name.

With his weird rants on grammar and literacy who knows how he took that.

[Lint Head]

6. Because we are in a war with right wing corporate fascism

and all's fair in love and war.

[Skittles]

7. no

it is prudent for the president to have all the facts before commenting

[blondeatlast]

9. Because we aren't the justice system or the press or politicians

If you can't grasp the difference, I pity you.

[dkf]

15. We and this site are being held up as representing Democrats.

This is why the Mods have to clean up now and again.

[blondeatlast]

16. Your concern is duly noted. You do notice the UNDERGROUND part, right? nt

[dkf]

20. Well I don't know about you, but I consider this THE site for Democratic discussion.

I'm not interested in writing blog posts or diaries or whatever. If I was I'd go to DKos.

[blondeatlast]

25. As in--unofficial. But--okay. nt

[mindwalker_i]

11. It's not just Palin

It's the whole Republican party and the way they call their opponents evil, un-American, or whatever. Then, enough of them say the "other side" has to be shot, killed, destroyed by any means necessary. Palin is just the most visible for this particular incident (for good reasons), but the whole beast needs to be challenged.

[seabeyond]

12. i dont expect obama to point the finger at anyone. that isnt his place. nt

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

13. I wish you and your pals would stop trying to whitewash the unwhitewashable.

[blondeatlast]

17. +11ty. nt

[dkf]

18. The truth will come out. Do you doubt it?

We are going to learn more than we want to know about this guy. And we will probably learn about mental illness also.

It just may become a teachable moment...or not.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

22. Heh. Hope springs eternal, I guess.

Keep dreaming.

[JVS]

24. If wishes were horses, then I'd be Philip Sheridan!

[Ikonoklast]

27. That's his job.

Why it's allowed here is beyond me.


I love how Democrats are admonished by the right to be 'reasonable'.

[RandySF]

14. Press would call it sour grapes

Because he was a target of her racism in 2008.

[Rex]

26. Why are you making up fantasy scenarios that will never happen!?

Why are you so concerned with covering for the RWing hate machine!? Why!? Just admit liberals were RIGHT about something and move on. Sheesh.

[Angry Dragon]

28. It seems a lot are forgeting something important

limbaugh has been spewing this garbage for over 20 years
others have joined in over the years because no one stopped him
palin is just another one that took advantage of the hate climate
of this country
look at how many so called politicians use the same words
The hate has invaded the media, politics, sports, church, religion, schools
No matter where one looks hate is the word of the day no matter where one goes

[Amonester]

29. What happened to the "Peace And Love" years?

I, for one, long for their return.

You may say I'm a dreamer...

[Jamastiene]

30. What if frogs had wings? Would you like that?

They certainly wouldn't bump their butt any more when they hop, because they could just fly.

Creating a hypothetical scenario that has very little chance of EVER happening is a waste of time and energy. You know good and well that Obama will not do that. So, why worry about it?

[Arrowhead2k1]

31. Stop fixating on Palin, lest you transform her into some kind of victim in the eyes of others aswell

It's not just Palin anyways. Obama should however call out the right-wing rhetoric in general like Clinton did after Oklahoma.

[dkf]

32. I'm not fixating on Palin, I'm fixating on our need to pin this on people like her before we know

What happened. We are learning more about the 2007 incident and it seems more relevant than the RW.

[upi402]

33. meh..but thanks for playing

n/t