I find it not only offensive thatany member of the media would attempt to link political vitriol to a human tragedysuch as we have all just witnessed, I find it unfathomable. How can a person be so juvenile and ethicallychallenged to go after an event like this in this manner?
Palin here sets the right note inresponse to this behavior. I am alsobeginning to think that she has a lot more to do with the writing of herspeeches than anyone gives her credit for. Her voice is just too distinct to be cribbed. In this she shares a commonality with RonaldReagan. In both their individual voiceswere too important to not assist in the writing. I know myself, that any statement I was askedto give would be rewritten by me in order to use my own voice. It is the nature of a writer.
As usual her opponents have onceagain covered themselves in cow shit with their actions. Had it any real effect anymore, one couldcare, but the public has heard enough to dig in their heels and to plug theirears. Enough!
Palin Blasts 'Reprehensible Blood Libel'Over
Wednesday,12 Jan 2011 10:01 AM
By David A. Patten
Sarah Palin hasreleased an Internet video condemning the crass politicization of the shootingrampage in Tucson that killed or wounded 20 victims, calling it “reprehensible”and a “blood libel.”
Palin’s video, titled “
“After this shocking tragedy,” says Palin, “I listened at first puzzled, thenwith concern, and now with sadness, to the irresponsible statements from peopleattempting to apportion blame for this terrible event."
Story continues below video.
Sarah Palin: "
Responding to allegations from some on the left that her rhetoric and a mapthat appeared to target Democrats for defeat somehow had fomented a violentpolitical atmosphere, Palin reminds listeners in the video that she has spokenout repeatedly against violence.
“As I said while campaigning for others last March in
Within hours of the shooting rampage which is believed to be the work ofa mentally troubled 22-year-old, pundits and progressive Democrats pointed thefinger at Republicans, blaming them for superheated political rhetoric thatthey said could incite someone who was mentally unbalanced.
Only later did the facts emerge: The gunman’s statements appear to indicate hesuffered from paranoid delusions and did not appear to have a coherentpolitical philosophy. Moreover, his first angry encounter with criticallywounded Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords came in 2007, well before the riseof Sarah Palin and the tea parties to national prominence.
National religious andconservative figures, including the Rev. Franklin Graham, columnist and authorMichael Reagan, and
watchdog L. Brent Bozell, have come to Palin’s defense. The attacks on Palinappear to be based primarily on symbols used to designate vulnerableDemocratic-held congressional districts on a map posted to her Facebook pagenine months ago. Media Research Center
Palin spends much of the video sharply criticizing the mainstream rush topoliticize the shooting.
“If you don’t like aperson’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If youdon’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especiallywithin hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should notmanufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred andviolence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible,” she says.
Palin also said: "There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blamefor the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. Andthey claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. Butwhen was it less heated?"
“Back in those 'calm days' when political figures literally settled theirdifferences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would becivil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren’tdesigning a system for perfect men and women,” Palin says. “If men and womenwere angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders’ genius was todesign a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by ourimperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republicis to endure."
Palin’s video was posted on her Facebook page early Wednesday morning,accompanied by a transcript of her remarks. She begins by expressing sympathyfor the innocent victims. “No words can fill the hole left by the death of aninnocent, but we do mourn for the victims’ families as we express oursympathy,” she says.
Noting the attack at a Tucson-area supermarket occurred as Giffords and herconstituents were exercising their right to free speech and assembly, shedeclared: “It’s inexcusable and incomprehensible why a single evil man took thelives of peaceful citizens that day.”
Palin, who says she spent the last few days reflecting on the tragedy andpraying for guidance, struck a bipartisan note by saying, “President Obama andI may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming thehealth of our democratic process. Two years ago his party was victorious. LastNovember, the other party won. In both elections the will of the Americanpeople was heard, and the peaceful transition of power proved yet again theenduring strength of our Republic.”
In some ways, the video represents the most statesmanlike speech to datedelivered by the former
“We need strength to not let the random acts of a criminal turn us againstourselves, or weaken our solid foundation, or provide a pretext to stifledebate,” she says, adding: “
“We are better than the mindless finger-pointing we endured in the wake of thetragedy,” she concludes. “We will come out of this stronger and more united inour desire to peacefully engage in the great debates of our time, torespectfully embrace our differences in a positive manner, and to unite in theknowledge that, though our ideas may be different, we must all strive for abetter future for our country. May God bless
Palin’s video statement is sure to be the focus of intense media scrutinyWednesday, in the run-up to President Obama’s address to the nation from