Unless you were a complete Snorlax over winter break, you have heard of the Arizona tragedy. A gunman identified as Jared Lee Loughner opened fire outside a supermarket in Tuscon on Jan. 8, killing six people (one of whom was a nine-year-old girl) and wounding 12. The most critically wounded of those individuals was the one the gunman intended to assassinate — U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.
Obviously, the question here is “Why?”
People have been trying to understand Loughner’s motives. The topic receiving the most attention is Loughner’s political idealology. This is not surprising, as he tried to murder a congressional representative who had a direct political affiliation.
The person receiving the harshest condemnations from these events is Sarah Palin. During her campaign in March, Palin posted a map of the United States that showed crosshairs over congressional districts where the legislators had voted for Obama’s health care bill. Giffords’ district was in one of those crosshairs. This map was introduced on to Palin’s Twitter with the statement, “Don’t retreat, instead — RELOAD!”
It does not seem a mere coincidence that days after this Twitter posting, the glass door in Giffords’ office was smashed in. Giffords’ father reported to the New York Post that the Tea Party constantly threatened his daughter. Even in the 2010 election, Giffords’ opponent Jesse Kelly held a campaign event that, essentially, involved shooting an M16 rifle to “help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office.” During an interview with MSNBC, Giffords said when people use violent rhetoric (Giffords used the crosshairs map as an example) and “(fire) people up ... they’ve got to realize there’s consequences (to those actions).”
The truth of the matter is that Palin heavily influences the Tea Party. In a video posted Jan. 12, Palin quoted former President Ronald Reagan in saying “we must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty ... each individual is accountable for his actions.” However, this does not mean that people cannot be influenced. When you are in a position of social power like Palin, you cannot be mixing politics with talk of shootings and gun imagery.
Why? Because your words have weight and authority that can persuade and manipulate people. (I also feel like I should acknowledge that Reagan’s quote was taken out-of-context by Palin — Reagan was arguing against social-welfare programs, not against murderers).
Palin is also getting a lot of attention for referring to this entire situation as a media-constructed “blood libel” against her. This is outrageous. The term “blood libel” comes from the hideous smear against Jews that they secretly round up Christian children, kill them and collect their blood. It is alleged by some that this blood is a necessary ingredient in baking matzos during Passover. One has to wonder whether this phrase was used on purpose, as Giffords was Arizona’s first Jewish congresswoman.
Jim Newell of Gawker.com pointed out how Palin redefined “blood libel” to “an instance when the dumb liberal media is mean to Sarah Palin.” How Palin thought it was appropriate to not only redefine but also to use the term “blood libel” in the first place is beyond me.
Ultimately, there is no direct link between Loughner and Palin. However, I do find it unfortunate that Palin acted and continues to act in such a manner. Using words such as “reloading” and utilizing violent imagery is completely uncivil, especially in her position of power and influence.
Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik put it best, saying that when people use rhetoric infused with hatred and mistrust of government, it works to enflame the public. Dupnik pointed out that this “has impact on people, especially (on those) who are unbalanced personalities to begin with.”
I want to, once again, reinforce that I do feel Loughner is personally responsible for his own actions. This situation should just serve as a reminder for how people (Republican or Democrat, not just Palin) should be wary of their rhetoric, lest they wind up in the political, media and social crosshairs.
A version of this article appeared in the Jan 19 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 24 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
This comment has been buried by moderation (show comment)
Reply to this Top
Josh wrote, "Jim Newell of Gawker.com pointed out how Palin redefined “blood libel” to “an instance when the dumb liberal media is mean to Sarah Palin.” How Palin thought it was appropriate to not only redefine but also to use the term “blood libel” in the first place is beyond me."
Sorry, but Palin did not redefine the term. Mostly liberals have redefined the term over and over again using the word blood libel for much less than Palin often so recently. The same ones hypocritically criticizing Palin now:
http://www.thejewishweek.com/blogs/route_17/blood_libel_two_faced_outrage_civility_police
Reply to this Top
Josh wrote, "The person receiving the harshest condemnations from these events is Sarah Palin. During her campaign in March, Palin posted a map of the United States that showed crosshairs over congressional districts where the legislators had voted for Obama’s health care bill. Giffords’ district was in one of those crosshairs"
Using such maps is common practice among both parties. Did anyone complain when Democrats do the same thing? No.
Here is an example:
http://american-conservativevalues.com/blog/democrats-have-their-own-target-map-and-bulls-eye-map.html
Top
Anonymous claims "proof" by providing a "democrats-do-it" map on some right-wing website.
Hey Anon, please provide a LEGITIMATE source and the name of the Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidate who created it and oh-so-proudly tweated about it. We will all hold our breath while you look for a source better than a hack site.
You wrote a great factual article, Josh. Thanks.
Top
Sarah Palin quit her state of Alaska to be rich.
She is does not qualify to be a politician ever again. She values money over her commitment to Alaska.
That is lame.
Reply to this Top
I agree she is not qualified. But it is more lame to continue to connect her to the murders when there is no connection, not to her or to her rhetoric. And it is hypocritical by liberals to single her out when liberals use the same rhetoric, guns or otherwise as well as use the same types of maps with targets. It shows liberals are not really looking for civility but calling for it while at the same time being vicious with their accusations. It is exploiting a tragedy to demonize Palin and others. It is sick and disgusting.
Yes, Palin and others, including her critics, need to tone it down. But those who seek to heap judgments on her cannot do so without condemning themselves as well.
Top
Eh, people defend her just to irritate liberals...which is fun. When you fail as a governor (ask Alaskans), naturally you deserve more responsibility. As a candidate she's useless since now she can't even take responsibility for words that come out of her mouth.
Top
Lets be honest: Sarah Palin did more for her state stepping down from the governorship. She is a national star; played up Alaska's beauty and strenghts in her TLC show; and she has proved that a middle-class gal educated at a STATE UNIVERSITY can make just as big an impact as the aloof and privileged Obama. If Obama can win the presidency on celebrity alone, I see no reason how Palin could not do the same. She has my vote -- we need a leader that understands the middle-class.
Top
http://www.freakingnews.com/Get-Off-The-Cross-We-Could-Use-The-Wood-Pictures-85416.asp
Is a picture worth a thousand words?
Reply to this Top
Damn if she dressed liked that on the campaign trail we'd be complaining about President McCain now.
Top
Josh wrote, "When you are in a position of social power like Palin, you cannot be mixing politics with talk of shootings and gun imagery."
Pretty hypocritical of liberals to be criticizing and blaming Palin over a tragedy for using gun and other so-called violent imageries, when that has been used forever, and their own President Obama (as well as other liberal politicians and media) used it himself more than once as well:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/dems-enemy-amnesia-obama-or-palin-whos-really-responsible-for-ramping-up-the-rhetoric/
Consider the following examples of extreme rhetoric rounded up by theblogprof:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/dems-enemy-amnesia-obama-or-palin-whos-really-responsible-for-ramping-up-the-rhetoric/
Reply to this Top
Josh wrote: "Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik put it best, saying that when people use rhetoric infused with hatred and mistrust of government, it works to enflame the public. Dupnik pointed out that this “has impact on people, especially (on those) who are unbalanced personalities to begin with.”
What the sheriff did was irresponsible. Before any evidence or facts came out, he was already tying the shooting to rhetoric of those of the opposing party. And yes, he is a Democrat, and a Democratic partisan hack at that (who is notorious for refusing to enforce the immigration law passed in his state). In doing so, he set forth rounds of liberal media attacking Palin and the Tea Party for the tragedy, when in fact, as the truth comes out, the killer is shown to be either apolitical or quite liberal.
It is irresponsible to ignore that one of the victims is a Republican judge, who himself got death threats for his stance on immigration from liberals. Should we blame Obama now on that basis for his death since Obama told Hispanics that Republicans are the enemies?
The sheriff should be fired. There is nothing commendable about grandstanding and using his position to cast blame for murder on those he disagreed with to score political points before any evidence comes out (and when it did come out, refutes him).
Reply to this Top
Palin think, now that is a riot. The woman thinks North Korea is our ally. She thinks you can see Russia from Juneau, Alaska and its 4400 miles. She thinks Kodiak Island is America's biggest island when its Hawaii. She thought our pledge of allegiance was written by our founding fathers when it was written in 1892 and under God was not added until 1954. The list is endless of her gaffe's and goofs. It took her six years to get a four year degree and at five different schools. This indicates she is flighty and she quit as governor early. Not what one would want in public service or reliability.
I don't see how peeps blame her for the blood libel comment though. She isn't capable of coming up with a speech like that let alone knowing what blood libel meant. Blame her speech writer not the teleprompt reading clueless politican.
The real tragedy is that some people think she is qualified to lead America and the press gives her legitimacy. Its embarrassing actually and makes us a laughing stock in the world. 38 percent approval rating means most of America agrees with me. 60 percent of America gets it and thinks she is unqualified to be president as of Jan, 2011. Only 23 percent approve of her presently. Translation, she won't be silenced but she won't win anything. Make her your candidate and you will loose. Not hard on the eyes but a beauty queen doth not a president make....
Top
Give me a break...
Reply to this Top
Uh, Tina Fey, of SNL fame, was the one who started the whole "I can see Russia from my house" -- not Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin noted that she has more dealings with foreign powers than Obama. This is true considering that Russia flew bombers off the coast of Alaska. Obama's foreign experience is living abroad as a tot and going on a photo-op trip with Dick Lugar holding his hand. Fail. Politician's make gaffes, big deal. How long Palin was an undergraduate is silly considering Obama will not release his transcripts and, I will add, attended two different insitutions before obtaining his B.A. JFK also attended a number of schools, didn't take his studies seriously, and was a poor student who relied on his Father's connections to get him by -- yet JFK is celebrated as a great president. People on the new left of American politics simply do not like Palin which is strange considering her middle-class background; her populist politics, and her outspokeness as a woman, as an American, and as a national leader. Once upon a time the Democratic party would have celebrated a Sarah Palin.
Reply to this Top
NOBODY celebrates a Sarah Palin. I don't think there is any jealousy from Democrats about her <incidentally I am a Centrist>. If she were running for prez or any other office for which I were voting, the other candidate would get my vote hands down. Her speech writers have given her the platform she operates off of now. She's great at giving speeches but she is a terrible leader. She vacated her position as Governor mid-term! That's just irresponsible.
Her popularity in AK has absolutely plummeted, which is very telling - those people NEVER abandon one of their own unless he/she is deserving. Russia routinely flies aircraft off the coast of Alaska, just as the US flies aircraft off the coast of Russia. The Bering Strait is only 70 miles wide. Observing that "Russia flew bombers off the coast of Alaska" does not constitute foreign policy experience. The AK governor has little pull in a response to such a thing - that lies with the US Military and the Federal Government.
I do not like Sarah Palin, and I don't care about her background - she has a very poor understanding of how the FG works, and she is a polarizing figure. The idea of her holding ANY public office is terrifying.
Top
So, Mike Z, anybody running against her would get your vote? No matter their record or qualifications or oh, I dunno, their criminal record if they had one? Now, that will certainly make things better.
Top
This article was clearly written by a child who has no perspective. Are you seriously trying to blame Palin for that psychopath's rampage? Use your head, and try using your time to prove something that isn't complete bull.
And judging from others comments, it doesn't seem like you have too many people fooled either. Nice work hot shot.
Reply to this Top
I'm sure the author of this article would like all opposition to their ideology to just go away. Unfortunately for them logic and reason always rule the day and nobody thinks that any conservative politician incited anybody to violence. Never mind that Jared was more of a liberal then anything and that he was completely mentally unstable. No, conservatives will not take this lying down. We will fight and the lying liberal left will lose.
Reply to this Top
Sarah Palin guilty as charged she needs to hook up with people start over with new anew p.r person all their for is to Leach off someones campaign. Funds
Reply to this Top
First off, we should not be playing the blame game with this situation, the only person who can be held fully responsible is the shooter. However, if you are going to be pointing fingers, it makes no sense to me why they are being pointed at politicians. Sure, people should try to be more civil with one another, this goes for everyone. I think that what we really need to be talking about in this case is the media. Unlike probably most of you, I was watching CNN when this story broke and continued to listen for most of the day. There was no accountability in the reporting. We were told the Giffords had died, and even heard a phone interview with a friend of hers who believed that she was dead because of this news.
If I had not heard a casualty count in this case by now I would have thought that 100 people could have been killed because of the way the media has blown it out of proportions. Frankly, it is very sad that this much attention is being paid to the situation. I remember the Omaha Nebraska mall shootings where 8 people were killed. That was on the news for about 3 or 4 days.
The media portrays these situations in a manner that glorifies the violence to other pyschologically defected people. It feeds their minds and if anything needs to "tone down" it is the media.
Reply to this Top
Snorlax? Really? Even on the op/ed page, can we reserve the stupid slang for humor pieces? I had never heard the term "blood libel" before. The description on Wikipedia also makes it seem as though it's not something Americans are too familiar with. Seems to me that she could have just as easily used those words coincidentally to describe the concept of fraudulently assigning culpability for a murderous rampage to her and her rhetoric, without ever knowing that it already has another meaning.
Reply to this Top
"Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik put it best, saying that when people use rhetoric infused with hatred and mistrust of government, it works to enflame the public. "
Except it doesn't apply in this case so it's a ridiculous argument. You may as well argue that liquor ads in the CT will cause people to drink or that Spring Break ads will cause women to get drunk and be raped in Florida. This was nothing more than a partisan hit piece on Palin which, in the author's own words, puts Palin in the crosshairs. If you want the political vitriol to end, start with yourself first.
Reply to this Top
<a href="http://www.pskiller.com/">Photoshopped Image Killer</a> can detect various settings that were used in the digital camera in taking the photo, and also compares an image against a large number of compression signatures. PSKiller resports whether image comes from digital camera directly or from Photoshop. This is extremely useful when you have some suspiciouly edited images.
Reply to this Top