A time to think

[Baruch Menachem]

Sarah Palin made a huge mistake with her comments after the horrific event in Tucson last Saturday.

The Gov. brought the negative press on herself and I'm surprised Michelle Bachmann and Sharon Angle have not been remonstrated for the words they used during the campaign, the most striking being "second amedment remedies".

Do I believe either Palin or Bachmann or Angle wanted this tragic event to happen? No!

Yet, to dismiss a "Second Amendment Remedies" comment as benign simply doesn't ring true. Words have effects, and to deny any indirect cause for tha actions of the shooter is disengenuous and simply partisan.

No one knows what was in the mind of the shooter. Yet defenders of Palin assure us he was "just a nut"; asserting he was apolitical and never watched TV or listened to the news is hardly credible. Someone attending college, expecially Jr. College where the students are youngish and idealism has not yet been extinguised it is hard to imagine anyone would not be 'infected' by a wide variety of opinons - some very extreme.

IMHO Gov. Palin failed the first test of leadership. Her first comments centered on the question faux leaders always ask first, "How will this effect me?".

I would love to rub your face into your post you made the day the congresswoman was shot in thread where the news first broke.

You really need to learn shame for your dishonesty.

 

[Liability]

Is Sarah Palin a leader?
Does a leader need to manipulate?
Is the vision of a leader win-win or does a leader see the game as zero sum?

Is Sarah Palin a leader? Leader of what? WAS she a "leader" in Alaska? Yes. Does she serve as a kind of spokesperson for some conservative views? Yes. Does that latter fact make her a "leader?" Not necessarily. But, possibly. That turns on a matter of semantics. How do we define "leader?"


Does a leader need to manipulate? Sometimes, probably., As a general rule, WE (in this Republic) tend to object to intentional "manipulation" as being somewhat antithetical to the rule of the "governed" BY the governed. (By asking that question is Fly Catcher "suggesting" that Sarah has engaged in some alleged "manipulation?" I'd venture the guess: it appears that this IS what he's suggesting. Unfairly and without any hint of support. No surprise.)

Is the vision of a leader win-win or does a leader see the game as zero sum?

Another loaded/packed question from Fly Catcher. Still no support for it. Slime-y shit. But getting to the question as it stands: it's also a false dichotomy. The "vision" of a "leader" might very well be "win-win" when he or she can make that happen. The "vision" of a leader MIGHT also legitimately be a zero sum game depending on the actual circumstances.

 

[California Girl]

Is Sarah Palin a leader?
Does a leader need to manipulate?
Is the vision of a leader win-win or does a leader see the game as zero sum?

There is someone who outplays Palin at manipulating people - Obama. And he's the President. So, apparently, you have no problem with manipulators - if you agree with them.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Sarah Palin made a huge mistake with her comments after the horrific event in Tucson last Saturday.

The Gov. brought the negative press on herself and I'm surprised Michelle Bachmann and Sharon Angle have not been remonstrated for the words they used during the campaign, the most striking being "second amedment remedies".

Do I believe either Palin or Bachmann or Angle wanted this tragic event to happen? No!

Yet, to dismiss a "Second Amendment Remedies" comment as benign simply doesn't ring true. Words have effects, and to deny any indirect cause for tha actions of the shooter is disengenuous and simply partisan.

No one knows what was in the mind of the shooter. Yet defenders of Palin assure us he was "just a nut"; asserting he was apolitical and never watched TV or listened to the news is hardly credible. Someone attending college, expecially Jr. College where the students are youngish and idealism has not yet been extinguised it is hard to imagine anyone would not be 'infected' by a wide variety of opinons - some very extreme.

IMHO Gov. Palin failed the first test of leadership. Her first comments centered on the question faux leaders always ask first, "How will this effect me?".

I would love to rub your face into your post you made the day the congresswoman was shot in thread where the news first broke.

You really need to learn shame for your dishonesty.

Feel free, if I was inconsistent or dishonest I'd like to know. I will either explain my reasoning or offer an apology. I am not intentionally dishonest, so I suspect what you really meant to suggest was I was being hypocritcal.
Until you post my words, I have no clue as to how to respond. The ball is in your court.

[btw, I was raised Catholic. I learned shame and guilt early - I outgrew both].

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wry and Learn are like oil and water

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wry and Learn and like oil and water

"Wry and Learn and like oil and water"? LOL

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How Progressives "Think"

Event.

Event= Good.

Obama. The Ossiah!

Event.

Event=Bad

PalinnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNnnnnNNNNnnnnnnnBoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooshsshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhFoxNewssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssPalinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[WillowTree]

The people who think "Sarah Palin made a mistake" are the same ones who always hated her.

That doesn't make them wrong.

Yes, it does.

 

[Liability]

Wry and Learn and like oil and water

"Wry and Learn and like oil and water"? LOL

Oh. That's cute. Fly Catcher noticed a typo.

Isn't Fly Catcher "special?"

 

[WillowTree]

Anybody who falls for this "let's all get together bullshit backhanded slap in the face" being put forth by the left is a damn fool.


but it was a nice try anyway WryAss.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sarah Palin made a huge mistake with her comments after the horrific event in Tucson last Saturday.

The Gov. brought the negative press on herself and I'm surprised Michelle Bachmann and Sharon Angle have not been remonstrated for the words they used during the campaign, the most striking being "second amedment remedies".

Do I believe either Palin or Bachmann or Angle wanted this tragic event to happen? No!

Yet, to dismiss a "Second Amendment Remedies" comment as benign simply doesn't ring true. Words have effects, and to deny any indirect cause for tha actions of the shooter is disengenuous and simply partisan.

No one knows what was in the mind of the shooter. Yet defenders of Palin assure us he was "just a nut"; asserting he was apolitical and never watched TV or listened to the news is hardly credible. Someone attending college, expecially Jr. College where the students are youngish and idealism has not yet been extinguised it is hard to imagine anyone would not be 'infected' by a wide variety of opinons - some very extreme.

IMHO Gov. Palin failed the first test of leadership. Her first comments centered on the question faux leaders always ask first, "How will this effect me?".

And you, being so much better than the person you are criticising, made it all about her, instead of pointing out that the real victims were the people who were shot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That doesn't make them wrong.

No, it doesn't. Calling her an anti-semite made them wrong. Pointing the finger of blame at her for the tragedy make them wrong.

Anti-Semite was a tad over the top for a poorly chosen metaphor. Still, it was poorly chosen. She's ignorant, not anti-Semitic.

And, they MAY be wrong about what pushed THIS loon over the edge, but a politically minded loon could very well take her hit list and misinterpret it as a directive. SHE even took the cross hairs list down in response to the shooting.

Like it or not, rhetoric creates an atmosphere. Some atmospheres are harmful to life. Some are harmful to the democratic process, and democracy itself.

She took the crosshairs down in response to the rhetoric about the shooting.

 

[Shadow]

Anybody who falls for this "let's all get together bullshit backhanded slap in the face" being put forth by the left is a damn fool.


but it was a nice try anyway WryAss.

I know...I love all these cute little "lets all make a pledge to talk nice" Threads. Then the OP's always seem to start new discussions (or join in other discussions) throwing around the same non "nice" BS. Because then they think "they" now get to define what "nice" actually means.

It's the ole "do as I say...not as I do" routine.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No, it doesn't. Calling her an anti-semite made them wrong. Pointing the finger of blame at her for the tragedy make them wrong.

Anti-Semite was a tad over the top for a poorly chosen metaphor. Still, it was poorly chosen. She's ignorant, not anti-Semitic.

And, they MAY be wrong about what pushed THIS loon over the edge, but a politically minded loon could very well take her hit list and misinterpret it as a directive. SHE even took the cross hairs list down in response to the shooting.

Like it or not, rhetoric creates an atmosphere. Some atmospheres are harmful to life. Some are harmful to the democratic process, and democracy itself.

She took the crosshairs down in response to the rhetoric about the shooting.

Why? If the rhetoric and symbols are benign, why should she cave to criticism?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Anybody who falls for this "let's all get together bullshit backhanded slap in the face" being put forth by the left is a damn fool.


but it was a nice try anyway WryAss.

I know...I love all these cute little "lets all make a pledge to talk nice" Threads. Then the OP's always seem to start new discussions (or join in other discussions) throwing around the same non "nice" BS. Because then they think "they" now get to define what "nice" actually means.

It's the ole "do as I say...not as I do" routine.

It's called hypocrisy. Yet, hypocrisy has its place. When one is faced with ignoring the stupid and partisan it is dangerous not to confront them. Usually I ignore Willow Tree, she is stupid. But on some matters even the stupid need to be confronted, even when to do so violates ones sense of right and wrong. For to allow the stupid to dominate the conversation can do great harm.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Anti-Semite was a tad over the top for a poorly chosen metaphor. Still, it was poorly chosen. She's ignorant, not anti-Semitic.

And, they MAY be wrong about what pushed THIS loon over the edge, but a politically minded loon could very well take her hit list and misinterpret it as a directive. SHE even took the cross hairs list down in response to the shooting.

Like it or not, rhetoric creates an atmosphere. Some atmospheres are harmful to life. Some are harmful to the democratic process, and democracy itself.

She took the crosshairs down in response to the rhetoric about the shooting.

Why? If the rhetoric and symbols are benign, why should she cave to criticism?

Wow.

What, in that post, gives you the impression that I am defending Palin?

If she had taken them down in response to the shooting that would have been admirable. She did not think do that.

If she had left them up in spite of the rhetoric that would have been admirable. She did not have the backbone to do that.

Taking them down in response to the rhetoric proves she is what I think she is.

You attacking my post pointing out her lack of either quality proves you are part of the problem you claim to want to eliminate.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Sarah Palin made a huge mistake with her comments after the horrific event in Tucson last Saturday.

The Gov. brought the negative press on herself and I'm surprised Michelle Bachmann and Sharon Angle have not been remonstrated for the words they used during the campaign, the most striking being "second amedment remedies".

Do I believe either Palin or Bachmann or Angle wanted this tragic event to happen? No!

Yet, to dismiss a "Second Amendment Remedies" comment as benign simply doesn't ring true. Words have effects, and to deny any indirect cause for tha actions of the shooter is disengenuous and simply partisan.

No one knows what was in the mind of the shooter. Yet defenders of Palin assure us he was "just a nut"; asserting he was apolitical and never watched TV or listened to the news is hardly credible. Someone attending college, expecially Jr. College where the students are youngish and idealism has not yet been extinguised it is hard to imagine anyone would not be 'infected' by a wide variety of opinons - some very extreme.

IMHO Gov. Palin failed the first test of leadership. Her first comments centered on the question faux leaders always ask first, "How will this effect me?".

And you, being so much better than the person you are criticising, made it all about her, instead of pointing out that the real victims were the people who were shot.

You are correct. The real victims are those who were shot. And I don't know what was in the mind of Sarah Palin, any more than I know what motivated the shooter.
My impresson is as I suggested.

 

[Liability]

Keeping it up (when the midterms were all over anyway) was both pointless and might have started to look a bit callous under the circumstances.

So, if she takes it down, she gets criticized on the false basis of "Aha! See!?? She must be admitting that it was an incitement to violence!"

But if she leaves it up, she gets criticized on the basis that doing so is "callous" or in some other way a manifestation of "right-wing insensitivity."

And yet, there are only those two options. Either leave it up or take it down. So, therefore, the lefty hacks (like Fly Catcher) WILL exploit one or the other "opportunity" to "criticize" Gov. Palin.

Their behavior and their rhetoric is so transparently dishonest and guys like Fly Catcher are such hacks; but that's all that Fly Catcher has ever been.

 

[Wry Catcher]

She took the crosshairs down in response to the rhetoric about the shooting.

Why? If the rhetoric and symbols are benign, why should she cave to criticism?

Wow.

What, in that post, gives you the impression that I am defending Palin?

If she had taken them down in response to the shooting that would have been admirable. She did not think do that.

If she had left them up in spite of the rhetoric that would have been admirable. She did not have the backbone to do that.

Taking them down in response to the rhetoric proves she is what I think she is.

You attacking my post pointing out her lack of either quality proves you are part of the problem you claim to want to eliminate.

After reading your post in question again I see your point. Mea culpa, I didn't get it the first time.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It is not hate to deem someone incapable of helping this country heal and move forward.

Thanks because obama has not help this country what so ever.
UNEMPLOYMENT numbers are just as high as they were whenhe went into office. Gas is higher now than when he went into office, Food prices have gone up, more people are in proverty now than whenhe first went into office. He's lied from day one he has signed bills into law that the American peopledid not support.
'So thanks for reminding us of that.