Sarah Palin Aide Rebecca Mansour: Our Crosshairs Map Had Nothing To Do With Violence Or Guns

WASHINGTON -- Shortly after news broke that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) had been shot at a congressional event in her district, observers began noting that she had, during the campaign, literally been Sarah Palin's target. But a Palin aide is now explaining that it was all a misunderstanding: the infamous image was never meant to evoke guns or violence.

Palin's "Take Back the 20" campaign (the website has been taken down since the shooting) called on Americans to vote out of office Democrats from conservative districts who had voted for health care reform.

On March 23, she posted an announcement about the campaign on her Facebook page, which was accompanied by an image of her targeted districts. The districts all had crosshairs over them, which are usually associated with gun sights.

But SarahPAC staffer Rebecca Mansour, who has been tweeting in defense of her boss since the tragedy took place, is stating that the crosshairs were never intended to be gun sights.

"We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sights," she said in an interview with talk radio host Tammy Bruce Saturday. "It was simply crosshairs like you'd see on maps." Bruce suggested that they could, in fact, be seen as "surveyor's symbols." Mansour added that "it never occurred to us that anybody would consider it violent" and called any attempts to politicize the Arizona tragedy "repulsive."

The suggestion that the symbols were related to guns seemed to come, however, from Palin herself. On March 23, Palin tweeted to her supporters a note about the aforementioned Facebook message, writing, "Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: 'Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!' Pls see my Facebook page." And as Politico's Jonathan Martin points out, in November Palin boasted about defeating 18 of the 20 members on her "bullseye" list.

Of the 20 districts targeted by Palin, Giffords and Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.V.) were the only two candidates to win over her PAC's chosen Republicans.

Comments

[gambleriver]

02:44 AM on 01/17/2011

Just ran across this. Sits a little uneasy with me but, well, someone had to do it.

www.freakingnews.com/Tea-Party-Pics-90571.asp

[John fulano de tal]

05:28 PM on 01/13/2011

But SarahPAC staffer Rebecca Mansour, who has been tweeting in defense of her boss since the tragedy took place, is stating that the crosshairs were never intended to be gun sights.
"We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sights," she said in an interview with talk radio host Tammy Bruce Saturday. "It was simply crosshairs like you'd see on maps." Bruce suggested that they could, in fact, be seen as "surveyor's symbols."

Did anyone bother to ask Ms Palin or Ms Monsour if these symbols were meant to be the cross hairs of a rifle scope (which t is technically different than the crosshairs of gun sights or a surveyor's map)?

[Lu4PUMA]

08:20 PM on 01/13/2011

The Dems have an almost identical map.
http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/08/my-congresswoman-voted-against-nancy-pelosi-and-is-now-dead-to-me-eerie-daily-kos-hit-piece-on-gabrielle-giffords-just-two-days-before-assassination-attempt-on-her/

[capercaper]

11:38 PM on 01/13/2011

Mansour, who has been the point person for this discussion, has said consistently they were not intended represent the cross hairs of a rifle scope.

[Until2]

12:14 PM on 01/13/2011

If a child drew the crosshairs of a gun sight over a picture of my child, it would terrify and horrify me. I would notify the school and the police. Sarah Palin is not a child and neither are the people whose images she used with a gun sight over it, but I feel sorry for the parents of those people anyway. It is a frightening image to see your child, regardless their age, depicted in that way.
In spite of her graphic, I don't think anyone believes Sarah wishes those people dead and certainly would not kill them herself, but she is failing to understand that there are many people for whom guns are not part of their daily life so that image alone is a horrifying one.

[Lu4PUMA]

10:33 PM on 01/13/2011

Where are the images of people. All I saw was a map, very similar to one the Dems have used.

[RockyMissouri]

05:47 PM on 01/15/2011

You fail to see the ignorance before you.

[nypapajoe]

11:08 AM on 01/13/2011

$arah again you failed to address the problems at hand! It's not about you, you, you! It's about expressing some degree of Empathy for those that are hurting and for the good of the nation! Your futile attempt to address these issue has again exposed you as being shallow and disturbed! It's a pity that you just don't get it even with all the money and political advisors that you posses!

[Congo Line]

08:21 PM on 01/13/2011

shhh...let her keep talking.

Obama would be the only President in history to win all 50 states if she continues to talk and run.

[BARRY08]

08:13 AM on 01/13/2011

1st = difference between targetting a GOP state and crosshairing candidates (posting their address and personal info) very different - 2nd = Palin followed it up with inciting language-comments ! Other members of the T Party movement did same ! and last but not least - two wrongs do not make a right !

[benjamin1943]

01:27 AM on 01/13/2011

The discussion of Sarah Palin's culpability in the Tucson tragedy on the TV show "The View" was a disappointment.

Barbara Walters and Elizabeth Hasselbeck waylaid the discussion into a defense of their sweetheart, Sarah Palin.

I don't know what to think of Barbara Walters. Is she just uninformed on the topic (could be) or is she in the beginning stages of senility (I hope not in such a gifted women) or does she just have a soft spot for Sarah because she has interviewed her and has been taken in by her and therefore has a soft spot for her (most likely).

We all know Elizabeth's problem; so her defense of Sarah is not surprising.

The issue is not cross-hairs. They are too easy to defend.

The issue is Sarah's repeated use of vicious untrue accusations and violent metaphors suggesting the use of violence to overthrow elected officials while hiding behind the first amendment (free speech) to protect "hate speech" and while hiding behind the second amendment (the right to bear arms) to justify violence to overthrow an elected government.

Listen carefully to Sarah Palin's statement on the tragic events in Arizona. She has limited her concern to the innocent victims. I assure you she is not talking about Gabrielle Gifford when she is talking about "innocent victims".

She considers Gabrielle Gifford, who is pro-choice, a "baby killer". And Sarah cannot consider someone who she believes is in favor of "death panels" an innocent victim.

[Lu4PUMA]

08:23 PM on 01/13/2011

Somehow, I do not think you are qualified to assure anyone about Palin. There is alot of objectivity missing here.

[Congo Line]

10:56 PM on 01/12/2011

It was great to see Boehner along with fellow Americans in Arizona along with the President. It was a powerful statement of bipartisanship and refudiation of hate speech to see him there.

[Lobo912]

11:51 AM on 01/13/2011

You mean his appearance by astral projection from the cocktail party in D.C.?

[Congo Line]

08:20 PM on 01/13/2011

I was totally being sarcastic. That why I used "refudiation" in the post. It's not a word. It's not legit. And neither is the agenda of the right. Epic fail on Boehner's part. Only a week and two fails. Great speaker...NOT!

[benjamin1943]

10:49 PM on 01/12/2011

Listen carefully to Sarah Palin's statement on the tragic events in Arizona. She has limited her concern to the innocent victims. I assure you she is not talking about Gabrielle Gifford when she is talking about "innocent victims".

She considers Gabrielle Gifford, who is pro-choice, a "baby killer". And Sarah cannot consider someone who she believes is in favor of "death panels" an innocent victim.

I think that cross-hairs are the wrong issue since they are so easy to defend.
The issue is Sarah's repeated use of vicious untrue accusations and violent metaphors suggesting the use of violence to overthrow elected officials while hiding behind the first amendment (free speech) to protect "hate speech" and while hiding the behind second amendment (the right to bear arms) to justify violence to overthrow an elected government.

Sarah Palin should be indicted for sedition.

[Lu4PUMA]

07:40 PM on 01/12/2011

Hey, did you know that the Daily KOS targeted Gifford?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/31592459@N08/5350132747/

And that the Dems had their Bullseye Map also?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/31592459@N08/5350747478/

http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/08/my-congresswoman-voted-against-nancy-pelosi-and-is-now-dead-to-me-eerie-daily-kos-hit-piece-on-gabrielle-giffords-just-two-days-before-assassination-attempt-on-her/

[Congo Line]

11:03 PM on 01/12/2011

PUMA. Long time, no shrill.

Like your political group, your links are dead too.

[Lu4PUMA]

07:00 PM on 01/13/2011

The third one works just fine.

[Congo Line]

07:34 PM on 01/12/2011

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/14/sarah-palin-scares-conan_n_796393.html

[Dan Richards]

06:20 PM on 01/12/2011

I remember Obama calling the republican party the enemy. i also remember him calling is fellow politicians hostage takers. To me that sounds like violent rhetoric. to me it sounds like a call to battle. Why dont I hear anybody calling him out? I guess it is ok when its a democrat party using violent rhetoric

[rickthaluddite]

06:27 PM on 01/12/2011

Because you don't know what you're talking about.

[capercaper]

06:33 PM on 01/12/2011

Actually, he does.

[Lu4PUMA]

07:17 PM on 01/12/2011

He is being called out. Just not here. Him and his guns and his knives. They can spin all they want but Obama set the standards of behavior. Palin was just a response to it. And that is why
http://pumapac.org/2011/01/10/sarah-palin-is-waaay-scarier-and-dangerouser-than-jared-loughner/comment-page-3/#comment-466764

[Congo Line]

01:23 AM on 01/13/2011

pumapac. lol! in the name of astroturf!
What watery grave of racism and did you dig them up from?
Thanks for the comic relief.

[Liz Ryder]

04:38 PM on 01/12/2011

You can't use violent imagery and rhetoric and then call foul and say you didn't mean it. Extremists like Sarah Palin have driven our government into a brick wall of polarization and irrationality. Conservatives that don't want to pay their fair share of taxes but still want a strong and beautiful country are irrational and "want something for nothing" - it is dishonest. Just like saying using "crosshairs" imagery and then saying it has nothing to do with guns is dishonest.

[rickthaluddite]

05:01 PM on 01/12/2011

Exactly. "I didn't break that window, I just threw the brick."

[Lu4PUMA]

10:35 PM on 01/13/2011

Gee, somehow I recall that starting with Obama. Him and his guns and his knives. He set the standards of behavior. Palin is just a result.

[ArchbishopBenevolent]

03:55 PM on 01/12/2011

Mrs. Palin is just annoyed that the psychotic murder apparently acted alone. The verbiage in the crosshairs and bulls eye poster suggests she wants to be involved too.

[capercaper]

04:20 PM on 01/12/2011

The map was posted in Mar 2010.

The murder Jan 2011.

[Lu4PUMA]

07:21 PM on 01/12/2011

KOS posted his two days before Giffords was shot. Do the math.
http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/08/my-congresswoman-voted-against-nancy-pelosi-and-is-now-dead-to-me-eerie-daily-kos-hit-piece-on-gabrielle-giffords-just-two-days-before-assassination-attempt-on-her/

[linaya]

11:54 PM on 01/12/2011

the map is STILL on her Facebook site. Look up her Facebook site for the date of March 23rd and it's still there.

Her Facebook site gets more visitors than her regular website ever got, which is why her gun site map is still on it. The page with the map on it gets daily comments.

[mollysmomma]

03:54 PM on 01/12/2011

Sarah wanted to get her word out before President Obama came to Arizona tonight to help bring us together to pay tribute to the precious people we have lost,the precious people who are still hurt, and the loved ones of all of these...............Sarah could have done herself a favor..............she came off very small and very thoughtless.

[Congo Line]

08:19 PM on 01/13/2011

She really blew it.

[mollysmomma]

03:31 PM on 01/12/2011

Will we miss her when she's gone ? NEHHH !!!!