During the 2010 midterm elections, Republican senate nominee Sharron Angle of Nevada said that "if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."
Lest her reference be too subtle for dummies, she immediately added, "I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out."
In March 2009, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn) said she wanted the residents of her state "armed and dangerous" over President Obama's plan to reduce global warming through cap and trade legislation.
And who can forget Sarah Palin's U.S. map of targeted Democratic congressional districts that used rifle crosshairs? ("Don't retreat...reload!")
Which brings us to Tucson, Arizona, January 8, 2011. One of Sister Sarah's crosshairs hovered over the congressional district of Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, shot with others (including a federal judge, who died) at point blank range while holding a mid-morning, open-air town hall with constituents in a grocery store parking lot. Giffords barely beat a Tea Party-backed Republican to win reelection last November.
Words and imagery have meaning. The far Right increasingly makes use of these dangerous examples to get their most rabid supporters foaming at the mouth. Make no mistake: these politicians do it because it works. At the least it might win a nomination, and often enough a general election.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter that the Arizona shooter is deranged. That goes without saying. But elected officials and candidates who engage in such provocative fan-flaming are planting seeds that encourage gun violence, and anyone with half a brain knows it.
It's time for the Sharron Angle's of this world, and her fellow travelers, to "man up."
Palin already has her supporters saying that her 'crosshairs' was misunderstood....
If that is the case- then please tell - - why oh why sarah did you pull the ad down after the shooting?
The commentary of Bauchmann and Angel have been way over the top. Your examples are just the start....
It is echoed then day in and day out on Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck and - well - mostly anything Fox...
But - will it change anything?
Not until advertisers decide they no longer want their products associated with the hate rhetoric.
Not until the public says to Michelle - you have gone to far....You need to be replaced
Not until the press refuses to follow and gloat over sarah and take her words to be serious, thoughtful
commentary worthy of our airwaves and our time
Not until people stop showing up for rallies
Not until people turn off the insanity and the hatred spouted on TV
America - politicians and TV and radio - - they deliver to us what WE are watching - what WE are tuning in to.......If you are not happy with what happened - if you don't want to see more - then
find more responsible people to vote for
find more responsible reporters to rely on
find more responsible companies to buy from than those who would pay to support such speach
It is OUR country - WE do
Yes, it does matter. If he is mentally ill then he is not fully responsible for his actions.
My point was that his mental instability in no way excuses the kind of gun rhetoric that now flows freely from the far Right. I can hear Sharron Angle right now: "Oh, my goodness, that guy was nuts, so nothing I've said can possibly be construed as inciting violence."
This is what these politicians do. They engage in dangerous hot house rhetoric, and then when people (albeit unstable people) act on what they've been constantly fed, the politician jumps up and pleads innocent, washing their hands of any responsibility.
They weren't deranged; they were merely zealots who bought into the "baby killer" rhetoric that was then and now tossed about freely and without concern for any consequences. Since 1993 nine doctors and employees of abortion clinics have been murdered and another 22 grievously injured. None of the murderers were found to be mentally ill; with only one known exception, all were ardently anti-abortion and many were connected with local protest groups.
Abortion-rights activists have argued since the late 70's that vitriolic rhetoric all to often becomes a catalyst for violence. The shootings in Tucson are the newest indicator of the truth of that argument.
Judging by the muted and almost, dare I say, thoughtful discussion of this on righty forums (of course, mixed into the usual blind faith) I'd say that a large number of the right see some problem in this act that cant be blamed away on the left so easily.
If only everyone would listen to how the president speaks and deals with problems and follow his example, perhaps terrible things like this would not happen.
Faved by an already fan.
I wouldn't expect electioneering could be limited to 74 days, but certainly 6 months sounds like a reasonable time frame. The other important thing that needs to change is Campaign Finance Reform. Until that is done, there are going to be many, many problems.