I stopped watching when she invoked Ronnie "Contra affair" Reagan's philosophy of criminality to analyze the assignment of blame in the Gifford shooting.

Note: I am not spell checking--I had surgery recently and am not in right mind. But here is input.

@ Netrunner and Jigga; this is not so much about one or two or five-hundred people. This is about societal rhetoric. Here is a post I placed elsewhere.

Sara Palin is just a woman on a path to wealth and power---not any different than most men and women out there. How she does it isn't even unique either. I am speaking of society here, of us all.

Many just lay blame at this guy's mental instability, but here is a truth, or barring that, here is a statement that is not incorrect. "You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. However, if the horse does drink, then you are the one that led him to the water."

My wife and I were talking the old schoolyard days. She mentioned a girl who always treated everyone nice. I listened and asked "Why is she nice?" My wife responded, "Because she never made fun of anyone or hurt anyone." I replied, "That is not nice, that is indifferent because she also never helped anyone but herself. And who did she hang out with?" And I answered for my wife. "She hung out with the bullies, the preps, and the kind of guys who would violate the weak with hockey sticks. Although I was never bullied, I know they were merciless. Now,dear, how can they be merciless? Because its popular. Because without this girl's attention, and every other "nice" girl's attention, their attitudes would change. But she encourages it, facilitates it, and does that make her a nice girl? It is just the same reason there are no "nice" guys left, because they finish last."

The "nice" girl in this story never realized she actively, unconsciously supported the Tards in school---but personal responsibility says she did. So I blame her for the punches and kicks others received? Not directly, but she had a part.

This nut job could have easily been offended by Gifford's "conservative" side, and took Alan Grayson's argument, and other left's too, and decided Gifford must die.

The problem was/is, the mentally ill are very easily manipulated, even when one does not know they are manipulating them. All he hears is "truthful" banter. He cannot see rhetoric. He believes. It is like giving a 20 dollar bill to a blind man. And so his actions are based on our lies. Of course "we" can tell which statements are lies---but as the years progress, less and less are able to because the truth is told less and less. Then, even the sane (Like nowadays) start believing the hype.

>> ^sirex:

>> ^ShakaUVM:

Olbermann should take his own fucking advice on "vitriolic rhetoric", but that would require a higher level of cognitive function than he's capable of. He's an amazing fucking hypocrite.


I can only guess you missed the "i apologise for and repudiate any act or anything in my past that may have even inadvertantly encouraged violence".
....and i'm guessing that you missed it because you didn't watch it.

I watched the whole thing. I'm not directly talking about inciting people to violence, but using vitriolic words to create an "atmosphere of hate" that has him so up in arms. Olbermann is one of the angriest guys on television, so hearing these words come out of his mouth against vitriol was especially amusing to me.

The comment above me, for example, shows Sarah Palin brewing a hot cup of tea, which indicates they're unaware or uncaring the worst hatred and vitriol these days comes from people like Olbermann or Matthews, not weepy bastards like Glenn Beck.

>> ^ShakaUVM:


Olbermann should take his own fucking advice on "vitriolic rhetoric", but that would require a higher level of cognitive function than he's capable of. He's an amazing fucking hypocrite.



I can only guess you missed the "i apologise for and repudiate any act or anything in my past that may have even inadvertantly encouraged violence".

....and i'm guessing that you missed it because you didn't watch it.

And if anything portrayed in those links would have happened do you actually expect that people wouldn't have brought it up? Seriously? It's national news and it's important to discuss even if you don't agree.

And by the way, you're the one bringing attention to the video you're complaining about by posting a link to it in an unrelated thread...

>> ^quantumushroom:

Who here is responsible for returning ancient sifts like this to the top of the queue, in order to join the lamestream media in trying to pin the murderous actions of a lone, mentally-ill vermin on Sarah Palin, the Tea Party or the Right?
You're better off with a different approach. Seriously.
How quickly we forget:
Hanging Palin in effigy

"Mockumentary" about Bush being assassinated
Death Threats Against Bush at Protests Ignored for Years

The days of the left fooling too many people too often via media monopolies are over. Someone tell that punk Soros on your way out.

I agree. I almost didn't upvote it myself, for the same reason. I just posted for informational purposes. Even though it grants him a larger audience.


>> ^Sagemind:

Edit: thanks for posting but I can't up-vote his bigotry!
Cheers!

I'll ask my brother to ask his friend. Netrunner says poli sci folks are also saying legislative obfuscation is at its highest since the Civil War, also. I've asked my brother to ask his friend about this, too.

In reply to this comment by kymbos:
Really interesting comment, bareboards - could I trouble you for a link to a paper your friend might have about your point on rhetoric?

In reply to this comment by bareboards2:
Now for some facts. I am a fan of facts. I just got this email from my extremely conservative Mormon brother, as part of an email exchange about the topic of scaling back the rhetoric:

I have a friend at Church who is pursuing his PhD in Political Science at UC Davis. I asked the question about the level of rhetoric because of your observations.

Poly Sci guys find ways to collect metrics and quantify everything. He stated that their metrics suggest this is the most divisive dialogue since the civil War.

I honestly didn't expect that answer. I thought it had always been bad and I was just not sensitive to the issue.

>> ^bareboards2:

Poly Sci guys find ways to collect metrics and quantify everything. He stated that their metrics suggest this is the most divisive dialogue since the civil War.

As an aside, the Poli Sci guys are also pointing out that the level of legislative obstruction is also at levels not seen since the run up to the civil war.

>> ^archer_of_loaf:

Palin deserves a serious amount of shit for that terrible crosshairs map, a.k.a. hitlist. It's ridiculous how an elected official would ever do such a thing. That map is pure HATE.


Judging from the map she also deserves some serious shit for mixing her metaphors.

Now for some facts. I am a fan of facts. I just got this email from my extremely conservative Mormon brother, as part of an email exchange about the topic of scaling back the rhetoric:

I have a friend at Church who is pursuing his PhD in Political Science at UC Davis. I asked the question about the level of rhetoric because of your observations.

Poly Sci guys find ways to collect metrics and quantify everything. He stated that their metrics suggest this is the most divisive dialogue since the civil War.

I honestly didn't expect that answer. I thought it had always been bad and I was just not sensitive to the issue.







>> ^SuperHotbUNZ:

I couldnt agree more with the comment below
Look, we need to get some things straight:
1. There is no proven link between the shooter and any group. ANY group.
2. One can denounce the "gun targeting" fund raiser from an a priori standpoint.
3. The shooter met the Representative in 2007 long before Palin was on the national scene.
4. The shooter was from an economic class under siege, esp. in Arizona after the housing bust. He was booted from school for disruptive behavior, his economic future was bust.
5. If Palin et al. had such a potent effect, we should see daily if not multiple shootings per day, bombings, etc. given the 100s of millions of people she reaches via the media. These things happen for very personal reasons; politics, if it is involved, is just a fig leaf.
Bottom line: trying to score points off of a tragedy like this is the very mindset that puts us where we are as a nation. We need to unplug from the 24 hour news cycle and focus on our own here and now, and the people who are hurting and going unhelped.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by chicchorea.

*isdupe
>> ^vaporlock:

Sorry this is a dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Keith-Olbermann-Special-Comment-On-Gabrielle-Giffords-Shooti

I agree, people aren't motivated to kill by phrases like "don't retreat, reload" or state billboards with crosshairs, but by the exaggerated and false and highly incendiary rhetoric they voice about individual rights, morality and the economy.

If you truly believed that a vague and amorphous entity called 'the government' was going to devalue everyone's currency to nothing and was brainwashing its citizens, would you not be compelled to act drastically?>> ^blankfist:

Wow, what a nutbag. As an aside, I think people may be placing blame wrongfully on the Tea Party and Palin for this incident. This guy seems more like an Alex Jones conspiratorial nutbag than anything else. That's what he seems like to me. Someone who came to libertarianism but got very lost and very angry in the process.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by vaporlock. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Sorry this is a *dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Keith-Olbermann-Special-Comment-On-Gabrielle-Giffords-Shooti