Red means: "Already retiring at the end of their terms. 17 more to go!"
Sarah Palin today tweeted:
Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: "Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!" Pls see my Facebook page.
Since I'm in that "lovers of America" crowd, I went to Palin's Facebook page, where I saw her new note about firing the 20 members of Congress who voted for health reform and whose districts went to the McCain/Palin ticket in 2008. Palin writes:
We'll aim for these races and many others. This is just the first salvo in a fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to Washington.
Palin includes a map with districts she's aiming for -- each marked with what looks a lot like a rifle scope. Or maybe it's just me.
Full image, after the jump:
Leave a Comment:
Definitely a scope image, to complete the violent rhetoric of "reload".
Anyone surprised?
Who is this Palin person really??? And what is her background?? Did she escape from a mental hospital???
Sarah Palin needs to go to jail for this!! I don't know if she escaped from a mental hospital but this is just irresponsible and I hope she doesn't escape from prosecution. She has encouraged gun violence toward members of congress. Her gun violence rhetoric needs to stop and she needs to be brought up on accessory charges for these murders and attempted murders. Her behavior could be deemed as an act of a traitor. Violence against government officials. Can anybody say "rendition?"
Knock knock. Are you aware of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution?
Just because some PSYCHO decides to MURDER people, DO NOT BLAME PALIN.
It's not like Palin called this dude up and asked him to off people.
And if you think that, you need to see a PSYCHOLOGIST so that you can determine the root of your mental illness.
So, Karen, we are not to be held responsible for our words? We can spew whatever hate and vitriol without accepting any responsibility for how our words are used?
Political debate - even highly heated debate - is a tradition in this country, but the country needs to start holding the attack dogs responsible for the damage they cause. This isn't the first time this kind of thing has happened and as long as the Palins and Limbaughs are not held accountable, it won't be the last.
Felicity
I will repeat - Read the first amendment to the US Constitution.
Freedom entails responsibility. Each of us is responsible for OURSELVES.
The perpetrator is alone responsible for his actions.
If I asked you to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, WOULD YOU?
Since I frequently refer to the Constitution, I have it bookmarked so here you go. This is the First Amendment:
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights#amendmenti
I must've missed the message to "go out and kill innocents". Maybe my secret decoder ring is out of date...
Tell me this: if it had been an abortion clinic full of women receiving "procedures" would you go after the pro-lifers with equal outrage?
There's a difference between "taking responsibility for one's words" and "being blamed for the actions of a mentally deranged individual". If I suggested that all illegal aliens be ejected from our country and some crazy individual goes out and starts kidnapping and firing illegal aliens over the border out of a cannon am I responsible for that? Not.
Again, I don't ever recall Palin ever saying "go out and kill" the opposition. Then again, I don't know the whole story. Neither do you.
Why is this woman being allowed to run rampant?
I'm not surprised, but I will if no one take action!
I belive, that relatives of Arizona victims have to prosecute Sara Palin for this tragedy. It's time for american people to understand the diffeent between "Free speech" and "Propaganda of violence"
Serge
I hope the victims' families do not waste time or money trying to sue Palin.
There is absolutely NO BASIS for a lawsuit. Many people sue because they are angry.
Doesn't mean they have a lawsuit and there is none here.
Karen- I'd agree that a lawsuit would be unfounded. Palin, and anyone else, do have a right to say what they chose- there's something to be said for judgment though. Especially in an aspiring politician.
That said...
Of all the people in this nation who need to understand the impacts their words might have on less numerous members of the population (such as the mentally unstable, or political extremists, OR the sometimes deadly combination of the two); politicians and TV "news" personalities are at the forefront.
Like Felicity said, there's a necessary element of responsibility if you use inflammatory language and violent metaphors. It's a choice you make by entering the public sphere like that. Just like Miley Cirus and Brittney Spears will never have a quiet romantic life- It comes with the territory you're desperately grabbing at.
And to Zak- It's great news that you and I and MANY others missed the "go murder opposing politicians" message. The message was not intended to be there... And this reflects that we have an appreciation of the application of metaphors and a rousing grip on reality. Go us! My point though is that politicians are just speaking to us, their words are available to everyone in the US.
Yes, we have the 1st Amendment and Americans can choose to speak of violence or of peace. There is consequences. Always consequences. It is naive to say that the word does not significantly impact society and how it responds, in this case the government. Responsibility does and needs to be on the one that committed the crime, but there are those who hide behind the 1st amendment and say I had nothing to do with it. We are responsible with our words. Is it a crime? 1st amendment protects many. Look at history, Holocaust started with the word, Rwanda started with the word, and its responce was deadly. Internet bullying results in suicide and intimidan and fear in the work force creates animosity and employees that respond with violence. School shootings...it all starts with words, speech...I believe our biggest responsibility as a citizen is to be responsible with our speech, our words, and our actions and recognize that we literally influence the people around us, to say anything less is irresponsible. Am I being Naive? I do not believe so. Look around, pay attention, connect the dots. Respectfully, EEJ
Yep, crosshairs. No accident ... yet.
Who are the people? No need waiting until the last minute to defend them. We can send them all a kevlar vest...
Unfortunately, not even a Kevlar Vest would have helped Congresswoman Gabby Giffords today - since she was shot in the head. Thanks Sarah Palin for inciting gun violence. Now you should spend some time in jail to think about how to be responsible in your activism.
At least she didn't mention the upcoming race to replace Sen Kit Bond in Missouri. It will be an ugly race to try to get a hero of Sarah's (Roy Blunt) elected. Talk about needing Pepto Bismol.
...and by "stand" she apparently means a hunting stand.
Mr. Femia
As a broadcaster, NBC has a higher standard than basic cable.
I suggest you keep your comments to yourself because I am now going to complain to the FCC.
I'll be taking that stand with me too. And just remember, AMERICANS have a first amendment right to express our opinions.
YOU just crossed a line with that comment.
Wow, what a hypocrite you are in my opinion. On and on about free speech, but now you need to report them to the FCC for their free speech. Typical crap in my opinion. You see, I said, "my opinion". I would love to ask you about the religious part of the first amendment and why God is still mentioned when it comes to things concerning government. From your comment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", that to me says God should never be mentioned in government because he is a leader of an organized religion. Not that is has anything to do with this thread, but I can not stand hypocrisy, and it seems a lot of people that are for the first amendment are also for religion being involved in government. So how about you? Do you only agree with part of the first amendment or all of it? I am just curious. Yeah, and cross hairs symbolically over over a member of government is not OK even as free speech, in my opinion.
As I mentioned, BROADCASTERS have a standard.
Femia violated that standard and since I am on a mission to ensure journalism standards, I have already reported this to the FCC.
Broadcasters are given a license by the FCC for the VERY LIMITED BROADCAST SPECTRUM that is available. As part of the license, BROADCASTERS ARE REQUIRED TO PROMOTE THE PUBLIC GOOD.
They have a higher standard than basic cable which is not licensed by the FCC. But, there are people who want to regulate basic cable.
Broadcasters DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH by the way. As individuals they do, but Mr. Femia prominently displayed the BROADCASTING NBC LOGO.
If he had not displayed the logo, I could have cared less what he said.
Have a nice day.
Karen,
Please provide some references to some of the following statements because I'm very curious if they are true. Assuming you read this...
1. Basic Cable is not regulated by the FCC
2. The right to free speech is not extended to broadcasters while they are representing their broadcast company (NBC logo)
3. Finally, I'm curious about the language in the actual document stating that Broadcasters are required to promote the public good.
That's it... and sorry if I've made myself out to be an idiot (#1 really surprised me, I thought FCC regulations were not only existent for basic cable but stricter).
Thanks I really appreciate it.
katriyablack,
I don't think you will be getting any references from Karen because I don't believe what she is saying is factual, but I am really looking forward to them if she can find them. Here are some real facts from the FCC web site that might seem to contradict Karen, that's because it's data from the FCC website and not an interpretation of what the FCC should do, not that that is what Karen is doing or saying. I can not speak for her. It just seems that way because of her comments.
This is from I also followed the links explaining more about the "indecent material" that the FCC can enforce and I didn't see anything concerning a hunting stand.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What Is the FCC’s Responsibility
The FCC is barred by law from trying to prevent the broadcast of any point of view. The Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast material, in most cases, and from making any regulation that would interfere with freedom of speech. Expressions of views that do not involve a “clear and present danger of serious substantive evil” come under the protection of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The FCC cannot suppress such expressions. According to an FCC opinion on this subject, “the public interest is best served by permitting free expression of views.” This principle ensures that the most diverse and opposing opinions will be expressed, even though some may be highly offensive. However, the Commission does have enforcement responsibilities in certain limited instances.
For example, the Courts have said that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and cannot be banned entirely. It may be restricted, however, in order to avoid its broadcast when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karen,
I noticed you didn't answer my question. That's OK. It really isn't a part of this thread anyways. Although, I am looking forward to references that back up what you say.
I guess this is her interpretation of political satire. She bends all the rules to favor her cause. She is just irresponsible and should anything happen to these folks, she is responsible.
Agree...Palin needs to held accountable for any and all violence against these representatives...
Morally what happened today SHOULD haunt her but will it?????
It won't bother her a bit .. now or later .. any feeling of responsibility will roll off that woman just like water off a duck's butt .. :(
Gun sccopes aimed at congressman, racial and sexually explicit slures? this is nothing more than ELITISM at its finest. these wonderful racists were also against social security and medicare. now all the old white repubs sit back and count their savings and income that is only there due to what they refused to support years ago. there not only racists but hypocrites . kinda makes you sick to here these words coming from educated public officials.
what was i thinking? sarah palin is clearly not educated.
What makes you think 'THEY'RE' educated../??
Baron Hill has been representing his district in Indiana for decades. He cares about the people and nothing $carah does will change his vote. He will be reelected for as long as he runs...and those rural folk need healthcare desperately.
Keep sucking off the federal teet, $carah....I know your family enjoys its native health care benefits. Hypocrite.
Get your target off North Dakota, if you even know where that state is Sarah. By the way I had fun coloring your book.
These less than subliminal calls to violence the wingnuts are using are scary.
Who is going to provide the common sense she is referring to? It's rare to see a politician so blatantly self-serving and coin operated. She is disgusting.
So Sarah, I also think you ought to insist that nobody in your state or other republican states get the benefits of this bill. We see how well that suited you in your own state, or how well Mark Sanford enjoyed having to get an attorney to defend him against legislators of his own party, so that he had the right to refuse money for schools. go ahead, take away the $250 credits going to Seniors and the disabled to help them pay for the donut hole.
It is disgusting that the imagery used by Palin is so blatantly violence based and sniper-based. She is a dangerous woman who appeals to other zealots. I, for one, am afraid of the ignorance that she spreads!
It's going to be a rough race, but I'm sending money to the ones who need it most to make sure our Democratic heroes don't lose seats to Republicans.
I don't understand why more people don't find this, and her, creepy. Creepy creepy creepy.
The map's "crosshairs" for AZ 8 (Gabrielle Giffords) is about 150 miles too far to the north, but it doesn't seem to matter, since some wacko found her office already and smashed her windows in (scary!).
This sort of violence-based rhetoric is far from harmless - there are real reactionaries out there who take these suggestions seriously.
[Tucson usually is an island of blue in a red state, but AZ 8 has a lot of retirees and tends to verge on "purple" - but Gabby is so moderate (and blue-dog-y) that she's got fans in my conservative mom and the Oro Valley Safeway crowd. The general reactions since the 2:30am window-smashing following Sunday night's vote are of shock and disgust - disgusted that anyone would do such a thing, and shock that there are right-wing reactionaries in our little liberal town! And to do this to Gabby of all people - she's such a sweetheart and she's married to an astronaut! Who could ever be mean to her? sigh.]
I met her at the Kennedy Space Flight Center when I was down there for a shuttle launch. She was so nice and accessible it was amazing! I'm so sorry this happened to her.
I wish she would go back north if she could find it ! and roll around with the polar bears.
I think the mere fact that not a single republican voted for the healthcare bill even though it contained many of the reforms they requested shows that the republican party is on the verge of collapse. Not a single one of them is willing to go against the party, do the right thing for the people, for fear of being targeted by other republicans just like FailinPalin is doing. It is so Hitler-esque!
Isn't this a type of incitement, to commit a crime?
I said the same thing...why isn't she being arrested as a threat to the president. They sure would have done it if a black man had posted a gun and said the same thing about Bush.
I fear that at somepoint some kook is going to think this is ok and actually act.... People who are encouraging this behavior and not admonishing it will be guilty of murder...this, Rush stating "take 'em all out", the behavior at the Capitol yesterday, etc.... it is only a matter of time..... when it happens they will probably cheer in the streets.... it is sick.... Free Speech is important but this is just irresponsible.....
Have you seen this bit of news? http://justjared.buzznet.com/2010/03/23/sarah-pain-headed-to-discovery-networks/
Sarah Palin is reportedly close to a deal for her travel reality show, Sarah Palin’s Alaska!
I am pretty sure I will boycott (or ignore) the Discovery Channel from here on in.
I believe what Sarah meant to say was "There were 34 Democrats that voted against the Healthcare Bill we need to make sure they are not reelected" She just misstated her intentions.
Why are you defending this nut? She's got a screw loose.
Re-read the comment, Karen. Bill's not defending Sarah, but saying we should be going after the Dem dissenters.
BTW, I'm a Karen & a Lefty too! Nice to meet you!
I have to agree with carolinaladyblu, is it not a crime to incite violence like this? I know it's illegal to shout fire in a crowded theatre, this is something along those lines. I know if I had said half the things the right has said while Bush was in office I'd be sitting in jail right now for sedition...
this kind of rhetoric and graphics may seem harmless, but it, along with all the other allusions to guns and killing of politicians they don't like, is creating a very heated, angry environment. People need to step back and cool down before someone gets hurt!
It would be comical if it was just Palin and a few wackos - instead, she is reaching an attentive audience. Free speech should be protected but even that concept has been stretched pretty thin recently...
There's going to be a civil war in this country if these "elected" idiots don't stop with the violent rhetoric and chearing on the scumbags who are threatening to kill the President.