DER SPIEGEL: Blaming Palin Will Backfire

[dali71]

Fox News and the right are going appepletic with feigned outrage with people who say Sarah Palins' rhetoric bears some resonsibility. Bet they didn't mention this prophetic clip...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7046bo92a4&feature=related

This will prevent any backlash.

You imply in this thread that other posters here are uneducated, yet you can't spell simple words properly. Classic Homer...

 

[HomerJS]

You imply in this thread that other posters here are uneducated, yet you can't spell simple words properly. Classic Homer...

Get a sense of humor. That was a joke. Instead of focusing on my typo how a non strawman response.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Aren't you the psychopath that wished for the death of another forum member?

Keep harping on that, something said out of justified anger that lasted all of two minutes before literally being taken back, while you keep defending the years of hateful inciteful rhetoric coming from the right on the heals of exactly the kind of tragedy it promotes.

You know, after saying what I did say in that moment, if that person actually did die, I'd feel horrible, and you same fuckers defending the right here would be raking me over the coals in a scenario where my words would have undoubtedly had no influence on such an event. And the honest truth is I'd still feel like I deserved it because what I said was wrong and over the line regardless. So like I said, keep it up, you're just showing what a flaming hypocrite you are.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://bigjournalism.com/dloesch/2011/01/09/the-difference-between-purveyor-symbols-and-crosshairs/

 

[HomerJS]

http://bigjournalism.com/dloesch/2011/01/09/the-difference-between-purveyor-symbols-and-crosshairs/

This is the spin put out by the Palin camp. Everyone knows they engaged in heavy gun/firearm rhetoric. The thin lines contructed at the end of a telescopic sight are reticles. The simple form of these lines such as found on a telescopic sight are called crosshairs. If you can find one article before last week where her camp stated these crosshairs were for surveyors, I'll eat it.

Trying to equate targeting a "district" in your crosshairs with a logo from a department store is a stretch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reticle

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Too bad Mrs. Palin herself apparently didn't know the difference. But that poster and the target/reticle/purveyor symbols are the least of the right's offenses and it's a disservice to the truth of the matter to be so preoccupied with this one item.

 

[LTC8K6]

This is the spin put out by the Palin camp. Everyone knows they engaged in heavy gun/firearm rhetoric. The thin lines contructed at the end of a telescopic sight are reticles. The simple form of these lines such as found on a telescopic sight are called crosshairs. If you can find one article before last week where her camp stated these crosshairs were for surveyors, I'll eat it.

Trying to equate targeting a "district" in your crosshairs with a logo from a department store is a stretch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reticle

As I said before, I have never seen a scope where the crosshairs extend outside the scope.


It's all spin, I guess.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256805/when-reagan-was-shot-brian-bolduc

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/1...mate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Too bad Mrs. Palin herself apparently didn't know the difference. But that poster and the target/reticle/purveyor symbols are the least of the right's offenses and it's a disservice to the truth of the matter to be so preoccupied with this one item.

And what exactly is the "truth of the matter"?

 

[Amused]

Keep harping on that, something said out of justified anger that lasted all of two minutes before literally being taken back, while you keep defending the years of hateful inciteful rhetoric coming from the right on the heals of exactly the kind of tragedy it promotes.

You do realize that the ultimate hypocrisy lies in the left decrying the use of bullseyes and crosshairs on maps, while defending violent videogames and music, right???

I mean, seriously, either the use of imagery is free or it is not. It can infuence people to violence, or it cannot. You really need to make up your minds.

The backlash for the left's kneejerk reaction here will be hilarious as they try to explain how bullseyes on maps are more harmful than violent videogames with that have you literally shooting people.

 

[HomerJS]

You do realize that the ultimate hypocrisy lies in the left decrying the use of bullseyes and crosshairs on maps, while defending violent videogames and music, right???

I mean, seriously, either the use of imagery is free or it is not. It can infuence people to violence, or it cannot. You really need to make up your minds.

The backlash for the left's kneejerk reaction here will be hilarious as they try to explain how bullseyes on maps are more harmful than violent videogames with that have you literally shooting people.

Defending violent video games? I don't think Hillary Clinton and C. Delores Tucker are hard righties.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

You do realize that the ultimate hypocrisy lies in the left decrying the use of bullseyes and crosshairs on maps, while defending violent videogames and music, right???

I mean, seriously, either the use of imagery is free or it is not. It can infuence people to violence, or it cannot. You really need to make up your minds.

The backlash for the left's kneejerk reaction here will be hilarious as they try to explain how bullseyes on maps are more harmful than violent videogames with that have you literally shooting people.

There is a difference between a video game about killing grandma and "news" that democrats are trying to kill grandma. It's a sad thing so many of you on the right seem oblivious to such a profound difference.

And that's the truth of the matter, the intentional misrepresentation and demonizing that goes on by the right with what passes itself off as "fair and balanced" media in order to inflame the population.

 

[BoberFett]

As opposed to the intentional misrepresentation and demonizing that the left is doing about the topic at hand?

I think Jaskalas was correct about you Gonad, I could see you snapping and opening fire at a group of Republicans. You've been foaming at the mouth the last couple days.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

And that's the truth of the matter, the intentional misrepresentation and demonizing that goes on by the right with what passes itself off as "fair and balanced" media in order to inflame the population.

The truth of the matter is that this shooting was turned into fodder to attack conservatives within minutes of the event. The left is the one making intentional misrepresentations and demonizing conservatives based on zero facts. God forbid that they yell bullshit. WTF are you smoking?

 

[Amused]

There is a difference between a video game about killing grandma and "news" that democrats are trying to kill grandma. It's a sad thing so many of you on the right seem oblivious to such a profound difference.

And that's the truth of the matter, the intentional misrepresentation and demonizing that goes on by the right with what passes itself off as "fair and balanced" media in order to inflame the population.

Keep reaching for those straws, Gonad.

Meanwhile, the backlash for the knee jerk reactions of the left are just beginning.

I'd like to know how crosshairs on a map incite violence while violent videogames and movies 24/7 do not.

And yes, the 24/7 demonizing of the Tea Party and Sarah Palin has been quite horrible. I agree.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

You know, if the right had conducted itself with an ounce of class over the past three years or so this discussion wouldn't even be taking place. You can whine and moan about this being political and play the poor victims all you want, but it was 100% your behavior brought this backlash about, and it's just sad it took a tragic event like this to shine a light on it.

 

[spidey07]

You know, if the right had conducted itself with an ounce of class over the past three years or so this discussion wouldn't even be taking place. You can whine and moan about this being political and play the poor victims all you want, but it was 100% your behavior brought this backlash about, and it's just sad it took a tragic event like this to shine a light on it.

Except the backlash is against Dems for trying to use the murder of people for political gain so quickly. It's already starting and the discussions are shifting to focus on the left. It's really going to blow up in their face and people aren't as stupid as democrats think them to be. The last election showed that, all their lies, misinformation and hate rhetoric didn't work and didn't stick.

And it isn't going to this time as well. The grown ups are in charge now.

 

[Jaskalas]

Let's not pick on any particular person here. It was wrong of me to reply to one person in this context when P&N's awash with it. I'm trying to mention that the great tragedy this week was not the shooting, it was our reaction to it.

 

[Amused]

You know, if the right had conducted itself with an ounce of class over the past three years or so this discussion wouldn't even be taking place. You can whine and moan about this being political and play the poor victims all you want, but it was 100% your behavior brought this backlash about, and it's just sad it took a tragic event like this to shine a light on it.

Bullshit. The right has been no more rhetorical than the left was during Bush. It simply amazes me how selective people's memories are and how their side can "do no wrong."

This whole thing has been nothing more than leftwing opportunists attempting to capitalize on a tragedy.

I asked to play this game with Craig, I'll ask with you, too. For every act of violence on the right you post, I'll post one from the left. For every inciteful political image you post from the right, I'll post one from the left.

Wanna play?

Meanwhile, if images can incite violence, why can't violent video games and movies??? Please explain how crosshairs on a map are somehow worse than games in which you actually shoot people and movies where people are gleefully dismembered?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You know, if the right had conducted itself with an ounce of class over the past three years or so this discussion wouldn't even be taking place. You can whine and moan about this being political and play the poor victims all you want, but it was 100% your behavior brought this backlash about, and it's just sad it took a tragic event like this to shine a light on it.

You know what's really sad...what a pathetic idiot you've proven yourself to be.

 

[spidey07]

You know what's really sad...what a pathetic idiot you've proven yourself to be.

Don't stoop to their level and call names. The past few years the left has exposed who they really are, what they really hope to achieve, what they really believe, their irrational reasoning and continue to do so.

Just let them keep doing exactly this. Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake, and this current discussion and blame they are trying to conjur up sans facts is a huge mistake. Even Obama knows this and has wisely shut up.

 

[piasabird]

Whenever a NEWS program starts spouting mindless leftwing indoctrinization we need to start calling the FCC and file a complaint thay they attempting to brainwash people.

 

[bamacre]

If you want to connect the vandalism to tea party members you'd probably get somewhere. Now connect it to what Loughlin did, and I mean with evidence.

I think we've discovered a religion, faith based guilt.

Not new...

Society and the Individual

We have talked at length of individual rights; but what, it may be asked, of the “rights of society”? Don’t they supersede the rights of the mere individual? The libertarian, however, is an individualist; he believes that one of the prime errors in social theory is to treat “society” as if it were an actually existing entity. “Society” is sometimes treated as a superior or quasi-divine figure with overriding “rights” of its own; at other times as an existing evil which can be blamed for all the ills of the world. The individualist holds that only individuals exist, think, feel, choose, and act; and that “society” is not a living entity but simply a label for a set of interacting individuals. Treating society as a thing that chooses and acts, then, serves to obscure the real forces at work. If, in a small community, ten people band together to rob and expropriate three others, then this is clearly and evidently a case of a group of individuals acting in concert against another group. In this situation, if the ten people presumed to refer to themselves as “society” acting in “its” interest, the rationale would be laughed out of court; even the ten robbers would probably be too shamefaced to use this sort of argument. But let their size increase, and this kind of obfuscation becomes rife and succeeds in duping the public.

The fallacious use of a collective noun like “nation,” similar in this respect to “society,” has been trenchantly pointed out by the historian Parker T. Moon:

When one uses the simple monosyllable “France” one thinks of France as a unit, an entity. When . . . we say “France sent her troops to conquer Tunis” — we impute not only unit but personality to the country. The very words conceal the facts and make international relations a glamorous drama in which personalized nations are the actors, and all too easily we forget the flesh-and-blood men and women who are the true actors . . . if we had no such word as “France”. . . then we should more accurately describe the Tunis expedition in some such way as this: “A few of these thirty-eight million persons sent thirty thousand others to conquer Tunis.” This way of putting the fact immediately suggests a question, or rather a series of questions. Who were the “few”? Why did they send the thirty thousand to Tunis? And why did these obey? Empire-building is done not by “nations,” but by men. The problem before us is to discover the men, the active, interested minorities in each nation, who are directly interested in imperialism and then to analyze the reasons why the majorities pay the expense and fight the war necessitated by imperialist expansion.

The individualist view of “society” has been summed up in the phrase: “Society” is everyone but yourself. Put thus bluntly, this analysis can be used to consider those cases where “society” is treated, not only as a superhero with superrights, but as a supervillain on whose shoulders massive blame is placed. Consider the typical view that not the individual criminal, but “society,” is responsible for his crime. Take, for example, the case where Smith robs or murders Jones. The “old-fashioned” view is that Smith is responsible for his act. The modern liberal counters that “society” is responsible. This sounds both sophisticated and humanitarian, until we apply the individualist perspective. Then we see that what liberals are really saying is that everyone but Smith, including of course the victim Jones, is responsible for the crime. Put this baldly, almost everyone would recognize the absurdity of this position. But conjuring up the fictive entity “society” obfuscates this process. As the sociologist Arnold W. Green puts it: “It would follow, then, that if society is responsible for crime, and criminals are not responsible for crime, only those members of society who do not commit crime can be held responsible for crime. Nonsense this obvious can be circumvented only by conjuring up society as devil, as evil being apart from people and what they do.”

The great American libertarian writer Frank Chodorov stressed this view of society when he wrote that “Society Are People.”

Society is a collective concept and nothing else; it is a convenience for designating a number of people. So, too, is family or crowd or gang, or any other name we give to an agglomeration of persons. Society . . . is not an extra “person”; if the census totals a hundred million, that’s all there are, not one more, for there cannot be any accretion to Society except by procreation. The concept of Society as a metaphysical person falls flat when we observe that Society disappears when the component parts disperse; as in the case of a “ghost town” or of a civilization we learn about by the artifacts they left behind. When the individuals disappear so does the whole. The whole has no separate existence. Using the collective noun with a singular verb leads us into a trap of the imagination; we are prone to personalize the collectivity and to think of it as having a body and a psyche of its own.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Don't stoop to their level and call names. The past few years the left has exposed who they really are, what they really hope to achieve, what they really believe, their irrational reasoning and continue to do so.

Just let them keep doing exactly this. Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake, and this current discussion and blame they are trying to conjur up sans facts is a huge mistake. Even Obama knows this and has wisely shut up.

You're probably right...but I'm still shaking my head in disbelief that a human being is capable of such a distorted view of reality...unfuckingbelievable.

 

[LTC8K6]

Whenever a NEWS program starts spouting mindless leftwing indoctrinization we need to start calling the FCC and file a complaint thay they attempting to brainwash people.

Olbermann's condition is chronic...

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Well the floor is certainly getting sticky in here now... Be sure to save some for Corn and Werepossum.