The reaction on the SDMB would certainly be different that’s for sure.
I wonder if the haters would accept some responsibility for their rhetoric? Sure the volume and scope might be lower but the level is often much higher.
Back to the OP: I seriously doubt that the Tea Partiers or other right-wing fringe types would come out in force, guns blazing, but it would certainly ramp up the paranoia exponentially amongst those already prone to it which could increase the probability of some other act of violence happening. And FoxNews would make hay of it all the way through the 2012 election, tarring anyone with a D against their name.
On the other hand the Free Republic servers would melt from the explosion of conspiracy theories, so, you know, silver lining and all that.
A certain percentage of Dopers would start threads saying they were glad that it had happened, and that they wished they believed in hell so that they could believe Palin was there. Or things like post #12, where Palin is blamed for her own murder.
To be fair, she should have reloaded.
What rhetoric? Is anybody putting gunsights on Sarah Palin or talking about “2nd Amendment solutions” to elections not going our way?
No, we just call her a retard. Big difference.
This is bullshit. This is right wing, la la land fantasy.
Ummm, that’s a huge difference. There simply isn’t the widespread use of violent imagery like the ones specifically targetting Giffords from the left. Even most in the far left do not use such violent imagery (like others have said, if they did, they most likely would be in legal problems, but IOKIYARW)
Use of popular and violent imagery from the left is completely hypothetical, and both of those combined with actual violence against right-leaning politicians would be required. Then we’d be able to compare.
No, it is completely accurate. You, for instance, wished a painful death on Tony Snow, and he was only a press secretary. Palin, having run for the VP slot and being a Republican, would trigger a reaction a hundred times more disgusting and filthy.
Please provide a credible cite for this. I would like to see that this is not merely an instance of selective perception.
And the plural of anecdote is not data.
Regards,
Shodan
I think it will be interesting when a Republican gets shot by an an right wing extremist.
Aren’t you always telling us how there are tons of angry right wingers just like you on the verge of uniting to overthrow the eeeevil liberal government?
You want him to provide a citation for something that didn’t happen? Perhaps a news story headlined, “Liberals Unlikely To Use Violent Metaphors, Study Finds”?
ETA: This thread is really, really stupid, for the record. It’s almost certainly true that right wingers would not rush to blame liberal rhetoric, as plenty of liberals have blamed right wing rhetoric for the Giffords shooting. However, that’s because liberals don’t use the same sort of rhetoric.
No…Dems are much more subtle…nuanced if you will.
Republicans want immigration laws enforced. Dems tell hispanics that the other guys just hate them. Obama refers to Republicans as “enemies” to a group of hispanics.
I would like him to demonstrate that Democrats never use any of the imagery that the SDMB claims caused this nutcase to open fire.
Show, in other words, that this doesn’t exist. Since that will be difficult, show that this kind of thing only has an effect on apolitical crazies when it comes from one side, and not from the other.
Regards,
Shodan
It would be a bigger deal because she’s more famous and it would shake up the 2012 Republican presidential race, but aside from than that you wouldn’t see too many differences other than the political orientations being reversed.
Here I was thinking it would be awful if a mother of five were shot in the head, but now you’ve thrown it into the proper perspective. Thanks for that.
How does this relate to the point you were responding to?
I might find it a tad more convincing if it wasn’t on somebody’s blog.
Not really. Their donors would have a fit if their cheap day laborers and house workers got taken away.
I assure you that if a Democrat shot the entire state of Colorado, I for one would condemn it.
Can you show the accompanying rhetoric? Palin’s talked about “salvos” and “reloading” and referred to specific people. Apart from using the word “target” in reference to states, how did the Democrats phrase things? I mean, I’d hate to think that someone was drawing false equivalencies here.
When a major box store opens called Crosshairs, you’ll have a point. Until then, distinguishing between a symbol that everyone sees as the view through a rifle scope, and a symbol that’s used to sell matching bra and panty sets, isn’t hairsplitting: it’s a major difference in how the symbols are perceived.
(Further difference: can you imagine a second-grade math problem involving a target with concentric circles? Can you imagine one involving a crosshairs? There’s a reason for that.)
In any case, as I’ve said elsewhere, Palin’s crosshairs map is pretty small potatoes when it comes to the vicious, violent rhetoric used by some right-wing leaders.
Us in Bizarro World am glad when people die! Us hate freedom! Us love ugliness!
Glad you’re enjoying the argument in a parallel dimension: I’ve noticed it’s one of your favorite places to argue. However, I do think it behooves us to leave the parallel dimensions to superheroes.
First, I’d cheer. Break out the Dom Perignon, etc.
Later, I’d be fucking pissed. What’s the best way to turn the devil into a saint? Make her a martyr. 'Nuff said.
Sarah Palin’s political career may be history, but she remains a VERY powerful public figure – to the left, she’s the “N**** Ya Love to Hate” (to quote Ice Cube), and to the right, esp. Tea Party & Co., she’s one step below Jesus Christ himself.
Strictly legal question: If the OP’s hypothetical ever happens, would the killer be charged with federal assassination laws (as with J.L.L.) or would those statutes no longer apply?
She’s never held federal office. Assuming that was still the case, I don’t see why there would be federal charges. And the cheering comment is repugnant, but hopefully that goes without saying.