Palin's an ass but she didn't cause Tucson.

Great Debates
1

I’m a liberal. But I do not value my politics above the truth, common sense, and reality.

What I value above my politics and above pretty much everything is the truth.

Crazy people who want to shoot someone are going to shoot someone. No one’s rhetoric, ESPECIALLY when it’s TV rhetoric (vs. the rhetoric of someone who might personally know the crazy person and have genuine control and influence over them, a la Jim Jones, Charles Manson) is going to turn a non-crazy person who has no intention of killing anyone into a crazy person who is going to kill people.

The most you can possibly say about the suggestive and ill-advised rhetoric of some people is that it will give the crazy person who wants to shoot someone their target; instead of randomly going to a school or shopping center, they might choose a political gathering and shoot a politician.

Suggesting that a map of gunsights drove someone to kill is stupid. And it is the kind of dishonest, self-serving crap that I expect from Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck. Don’t sink that low.

2

I thought that, by and large this had already been dropped by the left…no? Are there still people who blame Palin directly for this??

-XT

3

Is that insufficient reason to expect them to not indulge themselves in that sort of rhetoric?

I agree that the gunsights didn’t MAKE anyone get all shooty. That doesn’t make the gunsights okay, or make calling her on that shit unreasonable.

4

I think what the inflammatory rhetoric does is create an envioronment where something like that is more likely to happen. When workind with someone who is psychotic, it is not a good idea to feed into their paranoia with things like death panels, Obama is a terrorist, etc.

5

This topic is being covered in many other Great Debates threads. I’m going to suggest anyone who is interested post in one of those; I’m locking this thread.