"mission accomplished, Sarah Palin"
and from Paul Krugman, without thinking first (supposedly a brilliant economist,' who quickly put two and two together...so smart):
"We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was [is that Vegas odds, or your bookie in NYC?] She’s been the target of violence before [yes, see also the Daily Kos circa 2008]. And for those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind Republicans might be able to work with, might be a target, the answer is that she’s a Democrat who survived what was otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona, precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist. (Her father says that “the whole Tea Party” was her enemy.) And yes, she was on Sarah Palin’s infamous “crosshairs” list."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/01/08/paul-krugman-blames-giffords-shooting-palin-limbaugh-and-beck#ixzz0yHFeKwF0
I left the entire web address for the fabulous newsbusters article written out, verbatim, just because I find such beauty in it; for anyone else maybe not so much, but, please, I implore you now to go to the proof of hypocrisies raging from the left yourself, filtered through the eyes of a far better blogger than me, Noel Sheppard.
Please, go there now -- I'll wait.
oh the irony, when only a couple years ago the Daily Kos placed a bulls-eye, a target, on the BlueDog Democrat, Gabrielle Giffords, for not being liberal enough! funny stuff.
But boy is the fur of demagoguery flying today; and people are wondering why Palin is responding with a nearly eight minute video?
She had to respond -- she was having every liberal and their mother point fingers DIRECTLY to her as the root cause of an unspeakable, unconscionable, horrific, brutal tragedy.
"Enduring Strength" is the title of her simple plea to America -- taking a stand directly to the people in a four-minute-men fashion -- only that, duh, she isn't a man, she wasn't on a soapbox, literally, and it was more like four minutes times two.
The thing is, sometimes we use analogy, metaphor, or symbols to convey a message -- the message to be received literally, figuratively, suggestively or emphatically -- sometimes we, dare I day, communicate using no words at all (those are usually the best kind of all...and I mean that...really...or do I?)
I caught just the first twenty minutes of GB yesterday.
Our little Beck-meister Fuller was all about the use of imagery and symbols here in America -- a free country last I checked -- and the reactionary calls by a few dimwitted politicians who are beginning to plead their case to control what words, symbols blah blah blah is permissible to use in society today, and moreover, considering actually banning some! Yes, and let's edit the classics and burn books too...
One of my favorite moments was when he highlighted the tank rising out of the corner of some unknown website...only to discover it was promoting a show called "Cupcake Wars," oh the brutality. But let me stop there before I digress into miracles of butter cream...
Of course, again, the DNC -- the huge liberal machine back behind the entire democratic party -- used bulls-eyes on targeted troubled states just two years ago and nobody seemed to be too bothered. funny.
While the political pundits, journalists, and political operatives and officials, have resoundingly agreed -- politics has used the language of war for centuries, when up against the opposition, to win in the electoral battle. It's the nature of the political beast.
What I find amusing -- not that that matters to anyone else but me -- is that the more the left seems to flail and fight, but unarmed with the real tools to meet up with debate, tools that rely on sound argument, tied together by the merits of discovery, facts and truths, the more they unabashedly descend into dirty politics, bringing in the mud-slinging, piling on the name calling, and blanketing the airwaves with diversions...while clinging to the irreverent ramblings of their ruler, Saul Alinsky and what's become a liberal manifesto, Rules for Radicals, doing everything in their power to simply steer away from crafting good policy along side their political counterparts, happy to speak of anything but...
Good thing the general public can see right through it: the recent poll, quantifying the opinion of 57% of the people, believe that the harsh political rhetoric (i.e. Palin's crosshairs) did NOT add to the makings of the Arizona tragedy (while 32% -- assuming they are the subscribers of NY Times, the Daily Kos and the like -- do...but forgive me if I jump to any conclusions).
And then there is our Secretary of State, Hillary, saying "Look, we have extremists in my country [immediately tagging the massacre politically motivated]... uh...A wonderful, incredibly brave young woman, congressmember, Congresswoman Giffords was just shot in our country. We have the same kinds of problems. So rather than standing off from each other, we should work to try to prevent the extremists anywhere from being able to commit violence."
Placing a lone kook into the same, equal stature of an entire nation of Islamic Extremists, and those who wreak havoc on their own people, and other nations, every single fricken day -- who attack the innocent, every single fricken day, with suicide bombers...masterminding... all in the name of Allah... making purposeful, homicidal attacks upon the U.S. embassies, churches, synagogues and even mosques... nothing is off limits... from hotels, government offices, airplanes, subway systems, restaurants, the town square -- advocating jihad, inciting violence, encouraging new followers to join their efforts, and championed by Muslim Extremist leadership like Anwar Al-awaki, and Usama Bin Laden...
right. we have them too.
But last I checked, the only one that fits this description was Nadal Malik Hassan. Where were the liberals screaming out for justice, looking upon it as the same kind of thing as Islamic terrorism, then?
Loughner, although his actions may have been highly extreme, is not a comparison of apples to apples; the ignorance of a well-learned and respected secretary of state is astounding and embarrassing.
And no, Hillary, we are NOT the middle east -- extremism is NOT an every day American, natural occurrence and daily operative -- we do NOT have "the same kinds of problems" -- it doesn't happen all the time, as you so casually profess on the other side of the world, you might as well be on the other side of the moon (oooh tingle, sliding in one of my favorite rachel quotes of all time).
Of course, if CAIR has their way over the next few years, we just might be on our way.
see a perfect illustration of this in CAIR's response to Arizona here.
One of the definitions of being a Liberal is "Having, expressing, or following views or policies that favor the freedom of individuals to act or express themselves in a manner of their own choosing...tolerant of the ideas or behavior of others..."
the tolerance of anything but an alternative political view and ideology, then you become the target of just pure evil.
and what a concept, liberalism, for weren't the actions of a madman simply the free expression of his own choosing. just sayin'
The issue liberals seem to have living along side the rule of law, is that they seem to draw the line in the sand where they seem fit (and not respective of the Law and our Constitution), and namely, perfecting their own law by hypocrisy; to rule, according to how -- fill in the blank -- might work into their agenda, swing in their favor, in order to fundamentally change America. Most of the federal government we have today is an adulterated version of our founder's first intention -- a travesty of our checks and balances, a condemnation of our foundation.
The only way progressive policy works is to manufacture 'an organic' stirring of the masses, through cause and affect, never letting a crisis go to waste, to bring about an uprising from the bottom, through S'linsky tactics of ridicule and class warfare, staging reasons to promote social justice for all, in a workers of the world unite kind of fashion, and all the while, pitting one political philosophy up against another -- as if by some kind of random natural combustion. right.
The Arizona tragedy personifies just that.
In my view, it would be an understatement to say that tonight is a turning point for both the country, and certainly, this administration; the president will speak at the memorial of our fallen fellow Americans in Tucson. The eyes of the world, left and right and all those in-between, will be watching -- even though the business of politics has no place to lend an ear; the Commander-in-Chief, the Leader of the Free World, will speak to us, all of us, both the left and the right, yes, but hopefully, focusing on those of us who simply say 'who cares' today, in this moment -- in this moment, we come together, and not further apart.
I would like to hear him denounce the politicizing of a massacre to all of the Krugman's of the world -- I just don't think he'll do it.
The thing is, I just hope he remembers that he stands as a dramatic symbol (not a target! for anyone who might misconstrue) of all Americans tonight -- may he hit just the right mark, capture the right feeling, and plum annihilate any room for doubt.
Make it a Good Day, G
Post a Comment