where is the outrage when a lefty incites violence?

[R/T Hemi]

It didn't.

It did happen. She caused "cross hairs or symbols resembling cross hairs" to be placed on a map, targeting the office holder for that particular location. I assure you that if any of us posted a similar thing, over 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington DC, we'd be receiving a visit from some heavily armed guys who see no humor in our exercise of our free speech rights.

[AZhitman]

One who places cross hairs on the image of a person....

It's generally considered to be poor form to argue a factually incorrect position.

It did NOT happen. If you care to show proof, I'll wait. Until then, we're discussing things that actually occurred, not fictional depictions of nonexistent documents and media.

[audtatious]

Wait wait, first of all, the actual symbol Palin used was a surveyor mark. Argue if you like whether it resembled a crosshair, but secondly it was placed on spots on a US map, NOT on a persons head. Lets be clear before we point fingers.

Stebo, that's the second time you've tried to make this absurd justification. What the hell, dude. Why is it so hard to acknowledge that a political nobody getting more attention than she's worth did something stupid and inconsiderate?

Why can't those who attacked her for the "cross hairs" also attack the Union workers who have gone further by putting them on a face with the words "reload"?

Hell, the AZ shooting has been shown to have no correlation to Palin nor the GOP anyway yet because the media and others positioned it that way at the onset it seems to be thought of as true instead of it being proven false. Tea Party is a bunch of racists yet there is no proof ever presented that shows it to be true.....yet the Dems are still justified in calling them racists and nobody calls them out on it.

Before you get on a high horse, Palin annoys me so calling me a Palin supporter would be wrong.

[R/T Hemi]

One who places cross hairs on the image of a person....

It's generally considered to be poor form to argue a factually incorrect position.

It did NOT happen. If you care to show proof, I'll wait. Until then, we're discussing things that actually occurred, not fictional depictions of nonexistent documents and media.

Perhaps image was incorrect, she merely NAMED the target in the cross hairs.

[Cold_Zero]

The Congressional delegation (that appeared on Palin’s map) was not in the line of succession for the Presidency of the United States. For right or wrong, thus I am sure the Secret Service probably didn’t take direct action.
The example you picked out is directly related to the line of succession. So if you call out the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, President pro tem, or the members of the President’s Cabinet then I am sure the Department of the Treasury is not going to take a chance and will send agents to your door.

[AZhitman]

Yes. Incorrect is one way of describing it.

So, now what? What does this have to do with inciting violence?

Guess I'd better go back and find all my posts where I encouraged my staff to "take down" our competition, lest the hand-wringers accuse me of violent rhetoric. Hope there's no video of me coaching Pop Warner Football and saying, "Hand them their asses, boys!" And I sure hope my kids don't remember watching me at the track, joking with a fellow racer, telling him I'm gonna "smoke" him in the next session.

[heliochrome85]

Wait wait, first of all, the actual symbol Palin used was a surveyor mark. Argue if you like whether it resembled a crosshair, but secondly it was placed on spots on a US map, NOT on a persons head. Lets be clear before we point fingers.

excuse me, but what relevance would "DONT RETREAT, RELOAD" have if she intended them as "surveyors marks"?

[IBCoupe]

Why can't those who attacked her for the "cross hairs" also attack the Union workers who have gone further by putting them on a face with the words "reload"?

Hell, the AZ shooting has been shown to have no correlation to Palin nor the GOP anyway yet because the media and others positioned it that way at the onset it seems to be thought of as true instead of it being proven false. Tea Party is a bunch of racists yet there is no proof ever presented that shows it to be true.....yet the Dems are still justified in calling them racists and nobody calls them out on it.

Before you get on a high horse, Palin annoys me so calling me a Palin supporter would be wrong.

I'm not going to call you a Palin supporter. I didn't even call Stebo a Palin supporter. Get that horse out of here; your head'll hit the ceiling if you're not careful.

You show me a national figure that puts out publications depicting the violent targeting of individuals they oppose, and I'll go ahead and condemn it. Some union slug on the streets of Madison doesn't earn my outrage, mostly because he's not operating from a national political platform - he's a guy in a street holding a home-made sign, not a national political emblem distributing a carefully drawn piece of political propaganda.

[audtatious]

sure, whatever.

[IBCoupe]

So you're not going to?

It's fine if you don't, I'm just a little surprised that it was that easy. Now I won't have anything to mutter to myself as I drive down to NY.

[96Qowner]

Ah, fer pete's sake get over her! What is with this Palin obsession? The topic does not involve Palin - it's "where is the outrage when a lefty incites violence".

But I suppose that's uncomfortable for certain kinds of people to contemplate - understandable I guess.

[audtatious]

Opinions are opinions. I'm fine with your opinion and I don't necessarily disagree with it. I'm just tired of the constant one-sided reporting and labeling going on. A turd should be called a turd on both sides instead of constantly being swept under a rug on the other.

Example: AZ shooting being swung against Palin and GOP (and the 2 weeks worth of BS) whereas with Capuano it seems to be "but he apologized for his statements". You would think, after the s***-storm following AZ there would be a different reaction to his statement in the non-Faux news media. But, no.

It's a pet peeve.

[AZhitman]

excuse me, but what relevance would "DONT RETREAT, RELOAD" have if she intended them as "surveyors marks"?

The same relevance as it has when a group of legislators vows to "shoot down" a proposal, or "kill" a bill in the Senate.

I don't think Palin supporters even give her as much credit for being important as you guys do.

Now... R/T, I'll expect you to call for Capuano's firing. Shall I take a seat or will this be quick?

[96Qowner]

One thing amusing about Sarah Palin, though - she sure has taught liberal men what it feels like to get your panties all in a bunch. Heck, Sarah might even go commando.

[audtatious]

Nah, the news would have discovered that and reported it as a front page article.

[IBCoupe]

Ah, fer pete's sake get over her! What is with this Palin obsession? The topic does not involve Palin - it's "where is the outrage when a lefty incites violence".

But I suppose that's uncomfortable for certain kinds of people to contemplate - understandable I guess.

You mean that topic doesn't exist in a context where there was outrage when someone else (gee, to whom might we be referring?) incited violence? What the hell is the point of starting a discussion if you're going to b**** about references to the inspiration for the discussion?

Once again, you find me a national figure employing violent imagery against individuals (that rises above common verbiage, please), and I'll say they're being stupid, too. Christ, conservatives have made an art out of playing the "victim."

[szh]

Christ, conservatives have made an art out of playing the "victim."

Have you ever heard the phrase "pot calling he kettle black"?

Among the silliest inaccurate thing you have said in all your posts.


Z

[IBCoupe]

...I guess I'll try not to play the victim anymore? Don't think I have been, but I'll look out for it, Z.

[audtatious]

Again, pet peeve.....Seems to me the Republicans are more apt to call out their own for what they said or did than the Dems to themselves. The mainstream media is much more apt to make a big stink about a Republican than someone in the Dem party. If Charles Rangel had been a Republican there is no way he would have remained in the position he has kept for years. Same with Senator Byrd, Ed Kennedy, and others.

People still bring up the Palin "map targets" due to the AZ shooting when we all know it had nothing to do with it. Hindsight being 20/20 I'm sure she and other would not have done it. This is in pure contrast to the crosshairs on the WI Gov and "blood in the streets" shown/spoken within the last few weeks with no outrage or condemnation from the left. IF we are to believe the left really cares about vitriolic actions and comments then they should be totally up in arms over those two instances, regardless of GOP reaction. They are not which shows their outrage against Palin is simply political in nature and total hogwash.

[Geomon]

Amen, it appears that if your a leftist, Marxist, socialist, communist, or even an anarchist, then all sins are overlooked, ignored, or forgiven. I have lived in Europe, Central America, South America, been to Africa and the Middle East. By far this is the greatest country to live. The problem is that so many have been taught that this country is immoral, unjust, and we are the world's oppressors. Yet these pinheads have never visited a foreign country except maybe an exclusive shielded resort club and probably haven't even taken a sh*t outside the club grounds. There are problems here but not as dire as the left claims. I have never in my journeys saw the poor have colored TVs, cell phones, and cable. The extreme egalitarians do not get it, that no amount of legislation, financial redistribution, or regulation is going to equalize an entire nation. We as individuals are born with different talents, skills, and flaws. The left with their media apparatchiks claim they are fighting for the minorities, but yet do not stand up for the smallest minority group, the individual. Collectivism has been tried and has failed miserably throughout human history, yet the hubris of the left still think they are now smart and sophisticated enough to make this BS work.

[IBCoupe]

Again, pet peeve.....Seems to me the Republicans are more apt to call out their own for what they said or did than the Dems to themselves. The mainstream media is much more apt to make a big stink about a Republican than someone in the Dem party. If Charles Rangel had been a Republican there is no way he would have remained in the position he has kept for years. Same with Senator Byrd, Ed Kennedy, and others.

I'm pretty sure that there was a stink about Rangel and Byrd. People are pissed off at Kennedy for things he did years ago, so I don't know that it's an apt comparison. What gets me is that they say, "The media's out to get us. The media doesn't talk about all these other people who've done bad things that we all somehow know about!"

People still bring up the Palin "map targets" due to the AZ shooting when we all know it had nothing to do with it. Hindsight being 20/20 I'm sure she and other would not have done it. This is in pure contrast to the crosshairs on the WI Gov and "blood in the streets" shown/spoken within the last few weeks with no outrage or condemnation from the left. IF we are to believe the left really cares about vitriolic actions and comments then they should be totally up in arms over those two instances, regardless of GOP reaction. They are not which shows their outrage against Palin is simply political in nature and total hogwash.

Or, maybe there really is a difference between some sluggo on the street with a homemade sign and someone who's held up (perhaps incorrectly, but she's doing a fair job of exploiting that) as the symbol of a national movement.

[IBCoupe]

Amen, it appears that if your a leftist, Marxist, socialist, communist, or even an anarchist, then all sins are overlooked, ignored, or forgiven. I have lived in Europe, Central America, South America, been to Africa and the Middle East. By far this is the greatest country to live. The problem is that so many have been taught that this country is immoral, unjust, and we are the world's oppressors. Yet these pinheads have never visited a foreign country except maybe an exclusive shielded resort club and probably haven't even taken a sh*t outside the club grounds. There are problems here but not as dire as the left claims. I have never in my journeys saw the poor have colored TVs, cell phones, and cable. The extreme egalitarians do not get it, that no amount of legislation, financial redistribution, or regulation is going to equalize an entire nation. We as individuals are born with different talents, skills, and flaws. The left with their media apparatchiks claim they are fighting for the minorities, but yet do not stand up for the smallest minority group, the individual. Collectivism has been tried and has failed miserably throughout human history, yet the hubris of the left still think they are now smart and sophisticated enough to make this BS work.

I don't know anybody who strives for collectivism. I haven't met a single person.

[audtatious]

Or, maybe there really is a difference between some sluggo on the street with a homemade sign and someone who's held up (perhaps incorrectly, but she's doing a fair job of exploiting that) as the symbol of a national movement.

Sluggo was only one aspect. There was lots of outrage over some idiot with a Obama/Hitler sign at one Tea Party event and the amount of white people attending (like the union protests as well, but a different news reaction to it).

[IBCoupe]

I honestly didn't see much coverage of that, but take my observations for what they're worth - I don't watch TV because I'm usually using it as my computer monitor.

I know there were some public official comments that came out of Massachusetts (at least I think it was MA) that were very quickly redacted, and I wonder if the difference between them and Palin is that she never really did. In fact, she kinda ran her mouth again when she tried(-but-not-really-tried). Though the fact that I knew about the comments from a source other than these forums should say something about media coverage of those dumb statements.

I reject completely the notion that the media doesn't cover official stupidity whenever it appears. They had a media frenzy over Blagojevich, and he was a Democrat.

[R/T Hemi]

Yes. Incorrect is one way of describing it.

So, now what? What does this have to do with inciting violence?

Guess I'd better go back and find all my posts where I encouraged my staff to "take down" our competition, lest the hand-wringers accuse me of violent rhetoric. Hope there's no video of me coaching Pop Warner Football and saying, "Hand them their asses, boys!" And I sure hope my kids don't remember watching me at the track, joking with a fellow racer, telling him I'm gonna "smoke" him in the next session.

That's a swing and a miss there Hitman. I really don't see a difference between targeting a specific name vs. targeting a likeness of an individual. In fact, between the two, I find identifying a specific individual by name the more offensive act.
Using the Appealing to Common Practice fallacy doesn't support your position in this matter kind sir.

[IBCoupe]

I agree with Hemi, Greg; that was weak sauce. I rolled my eyes at it before, but didn't respond because it wasn't directed at me. Common parlance that has always existed in our political and everyday speech isn't really the same as placing crosshairs (okay, Stebo - they're not crosshairs, they just chose the closest symbol to crosshairs they could find without actually being able to be accused of choosing "crosshairs") over names.

[audtatious]

I reject completely the notion that the media doesn't cover official stupidity whenever it appears. They had a media frenzy over Blagojevich, and he was a Democrat.

Good point. They also reported heavily on Eliot Spitzer, probably due to the sex side of it more than anything.

I'm not saying everything is ignored. Fox is overly GOP and the others are somewhat to overly DEM.

[IBCoupe]

Quite possible, but I never get the feeling on either one of them probably because A) I tend to catch the straight news reporting when I actually happen to watch those channels and B) if I am channel surfing and I come across one of those personality-type shows, I keep surfing. I think I stayed on Beck for a total of two minutes to hear what the token Muslim he was interviewing had to say, but then I wandered away.

[audtatious]

Beck makes some interesting points but I dislike the way he does it. Hannity and O'Reily may lean a bunch to the right but they do allow the left to get their punches in. Of course, the left have similar in the form of Maddow, Olbermann, etc.

So, yes, it's quite difficult at times to get "base" reporting on a issue where you can make up your own mind.

[IBCoupe]

Honestly, I like NPR's reporting on matters. The only opinion you get is from guests (except for certain shows like Tell Me More where the host has a once-a-week segment where she gives her opinion on a certain topic in a clearly-labeled "Can I Just Tell You?" segment) and the hosts pretty equally challenge them on to explain themselves, but, and much to my chagrin, equally allow the guests to dodge questions. They rely on multiple, opposing guests to correct each other, on their topic shows, and on other shows, rely almost exclusively on expert interviews for their analysis.

It's everything a news organization should be, absent hiccups like Juan Williams, which only serve as distractions when NPR itself comes into conflict with other news agencies.