Sarah Palin Crosshairs
January 9, 2011 by USA Post
Sarah Palin Crosshairs, In a special episode of Countdown on Saturday, driven by the mass shooting that killed six and left Rep. Gabrielle Giffords cling to life, host Keith Olbermann declared an end to the violent political rhetoric. In so doing, he ran through a laundry list of examples of even conservative, plus his own, and while critics may paint this as an attempt to bludgeon opportunistic those with whom he disagrees his main theme deserves serious consideration.
To this end, if you are inclined to dismiss this speech is based on a lack of balance, pretend for a moment that has included examples of liberals using “target lists” and imaging bubble, and consider premise of his argument.
Here Olbermann Special Comment, MSNBC:
The note refers to Olbermann, for which he later apologized to our own Rachel Sklar, is about 3 minutes mark in this clip where he says Howard Fineman that the Democrats’ solution to Hillary Clinton was “Someone one who can take her to a room and only he comes out. ”
As Rachel Maddow said, it does not fit on a sticker, so try to stay with me on that. Any honest person would recognize that this tragedy, coupled with the inclusion Rep. Giffords on Sarah Palin “the card-shaped cross,” naturally leads to connect the two, at least cognitively. This is particularly true given the fact that Giffords voted on the use of such imagery.
It is also true that the “plan crosshair” was totally irresponsible. While Olbermann talks to rethink the use of terms such as “targeting” in electoral politics, the image of the cross is evocation much on the nose of the murder of this metaphor in bulk. It is probably worse than using Bullseye, which are inert representations of a target, rather than interactive tool that lets you target. For all these reasons, it would not have used, and was rightly condemned for it. Despite all this, I doubt anyone thinks that his intention was to incite violence, and his refusal to change is likely an attempt stubborn to insist on this point.
Meanwhile, Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas immediately tried to hang the crime on the “American Taliban”, by coincidence the name of his book, but it turns out he also uses a little uncomfortable rhetoric Giffords on the district. He put on his “target list” in bold letters for emphasis, and used the “bubble” metaphor as well. This is not exactly the same thing as Palin did, but given today’s events, there is ample reflection.
It was here that Keith Olbermann has a point. When the passions are as high as they do in politics, we should all take deep breaths and think about what we say. When a tragedy like this happens, so closely associated with our political disagreements, it is entirely appropriate to reflect on our own inability to recognize the humanity of those with whom we disagree.
But it is also important to recognize that it is the actions of a madman, and even if the alleged gunman finally said, “I did it because the map of Sarah Palin,” or “Markos Moulitsas painted bubble for me, “they will still be the actions of a madman. Only a fool opens fire on a crowd in a supermarket, and it does not on a failure to appreciate the nuances and metaphors.
So while we should continue to police irresponsible statements like Sharron Angle Remedies 2nd Amendment, “and Keith Olbermann own scenario Hillary Clinton beatdown, or fantasies Pelosi poisoning Glenn Beck’s, there is a place for violent imagery in the politics. In fact, the sight of Keith Olbermann. Every night, Olbermann has the best segment of the show by saying: “Get out your pitchforks and torches…”
The line is a reference to fear, angry villagers in Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, and is clearly meant to be ironic, as the map of Palin was clearly meant metaphorically. That metaphors are poorer than some other taste is a fact that should be governed by their merits, not the ability to discern them crazy.
Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.