I was struck by today’s response of Sarah Palin to criticism that her rhetoric and “targeting” of Rep. Gifford’s district may have added to the recent massacre in Tucson. In fairness to Palin, the family stated today that Jared Loughner did not watch news or listen to talk radio. However, I was most interested in her claim that the attacks against her and conservative commentators amounted to a “blood libel.”
On her Facebook page, Palin has the following comments:
But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.
There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those “calm days” when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren’t designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders’ genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure.
Of course, she is not speaking of actual libel. Such criticism of the over-the-top rhetoric of conservative commentators is clearly opinion and not defamation.
“Blood libel” is a term usually associated with religious groups who are accused to killing innocents. Blood libels have a strong anti-Semitic history, such as claims that Jews feed on the flesh or blood of innocent children. For that reason, the Anti-Defamation League has denounced the use of the term — though I do not believe that the simple use of this term is evidence of any anti-semiticism by Palin.
That is a pretty loaded term to use for the criticism over violent terminology and over-heated rhetoric. Indeed, it seems to emphasize a degree of persecution. There is probably some distance between dueling and discourse.
The closest term in torts is “group libel” which (as discussed earlier) is generally difficult to establish.
If either term is relevant, there appears to be an ongoing effort on both sides to tag the other with the massacre. Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik stated “The kind of rhetoric that flows from people like Rush Limbaugh, in my judgment he is irresponsible, uses partial information, sometimes wrong information. . . [Limbaugh] attacks people, angers them against government, angers them against elected officials and that kind of behavior in my opinion is not without consequences.”
Limbaugh has reportedly fired back by saying that the Democratic Party supports Loughner and is “attempting to find anybody but him to blame.”
In the meantime, members are moving toward a spasm of new laws to criminalize speech.
There is of course another obvious possibility: Loughner is mentally unstable and fully motivated by his own personal demons. Of course, this does not mean that we should not reexamine the rhetoric of our politics.
Frankly, I also share the concern of conservative commentators with politicians like Bernie Sanders (who I agree with on many issues) referring to the massacre in fundraising appeals. This massacre has somehow become about the politicians as opposed to the killer or the victims. That alone says something about the state of our politics.
Jonathan Turley
Buddha,
Would you define courtesy as showing a person a reasonable degree of respect until you determine how much respect they are due?
BBB,
With all due respect, you don’t need to be a mind reader to understand why I asked those rhetorical questions. No matter who spews the violent rhetoric, it is still violent and dangerous. Good night.
BBB
Buckeye
“I didn’t think they’d created it. I think Ms Palin, and those Republican and NRA members that follow her, like demagogues throughout our history have used it in an “I’m more patriotic than you’re patriotic” effort.”
————————————–
BBB
Do you think the we’re a better team than they are is a novel idea? Welcome to Motivation 101.
———————————–
You are correct. I misstated. They use it as “I’m the patriot here and if you don’t agree with me, you’re unpatriotic and need to be squashed – figuratively if you comply and literally if you don’t.” This is where the guns (on signs and on hips) come in – to indicate they’re ready to physically “take back our country” – from people who simply disagree with them. The yahoos love it!
Don’t be disengenuous about all the gun totin’, flag wavin’ fervor saying they don’t mean any harm. I also know a mob when I see one disrupting a town hall meeting.
The Tea Party will go down in history for the change they claim was due mainly to themselves in the past campaign, for the means they used to gain what power they will wield, and for the results of the few actual TP members that were elected.
Whether they will be effective for longer than the Know-Nothing or the American Independent parties, which they most resemble, is yet to be determined. As is the actual effect while they are represented in Congress – for good or ill or hardly at all.
BBB,
Everyone who is a regular here has admitted both “sides” have behaved badly, but like it or not, the right has behaved worse. You disagree? Fine. You can be wrong all you like, but anyone who has watched or read any amount of media over the last three years knows your simply wrong about who are the biggest and worst offending shit disturbers. King. Angle. McConnell. Palin. Limbaugh. Gingrich. Beck. Levin. Murdoch. FOXPropaganda network in general. As I told Slarti earlier, a dissection will serve as an assessment in reality.
You’re reaching – actually straining – for crap off of YouTube, made by anonymous people who may or may not even be citizens eligible to vote in this country and outright falsehoods about “surveyor’s marks” when Palin herself referred to them as “bullseye” icons.
Yeah, there is no comparison alright to Beck and his chalk board and Palin with her foot perpetually in her gun waving Bible alluding mouth.
Until the right quit embracing idiots like Rush Limbaugh, Mitch “I’m A Contrarian Obstructionist” O’Connell and the Neocon “Think Tanks” (what an oxymoron) like AEI and PNAC? It’s only going to continue to make the right look like the party of violence, incitement, obstruction, exclusion and hatred. Not to mention warmongering. In a desperate effort to appeal to “their base”, the right has gotten into bed with both the religious right and the lunatic fringe by false claims and appealing to their stupidity – stupidity the right helped to create by defunding public education every chance they got so that most Americans don’t have a damn clue as to what their rights actually are. If they did? They’d realize “Obama’s gonna come get your guns!” or “Obama’s gonna impose Sharia!” is a load of horseshit and they should be paying attention to the real threats like the very real erosions of the 4th, 8th and 14th Amendments instead.
The bottom line is this: there is no true left and very little conventional traditional right in Washington. There is only the sold out to corporate interests and partisan hacks like the neocons – all of whom should be arrested for treason by the way for encouraging, nay, ordering Bush to illegally invade Iraq in the first place instead of the country that actually attacked us: Saudi Arabia. Do you think FDR would have as prominent place in history if he’d responded to Pearl Harbor by invading China? If he hadn’t foiled the fascist Business Plot of 1933? No. He’d be considered an incompetent President and villain. But I digress.
Or do I?
Today, the graft system of campaign finance conspires to put and keep business criminals in office from both parties. GOP and DNC are only distinguishable by whose pocket they are in. The pols from either party who actually care about their constituents more than their corporate lined pocketbooks and overheated egos can be counted on one hand, maybe a hand and half. If there was anything else in the majority of all pols? Bush and Cheney would have been arrested and put on trial for treason and murder the first week of the new Presidency. Why? Because that “and justice for all” thing is pretty damn important to securing both trust and respect in the legal system. No equity in application means no justice. But nooooooo. Those big oil dollars didn’t want that. So one great injustice has acted like a corrosive on government. Corrosion added to by the heated language of the right and those who threatened “2nd Amendment remedies”.
The “they did it too” crap is getting old on the violent rhetoric front.
Man up if you’re really that much in the partisan bag and own your “side’s” bad acts for talking an overabundance of shit in their efforts to appeal to the rednecks.
“Well Johnny did it too!” is the defensive tactic of children.
Feel better?
I’d feel better if both “sides” would start doing their damn job as defined by the Constitution to both represent the best interests of their constituents and protecting the Constitution from abuses by assholes like Bush – who suspended habeas corpus – and Obama – who usurped the 4th Amendment by claiming he has the right to extrajudicial assassination of American citizens – instead of simply whoring out to their own narrow self-interests and those of their corporate masters.
But the nanny nanny boo boo is starting to make you sound like Tootie – unthinkingly partisan.
Well screw BOTH major parties, the Libertarians and the Teabaggers, but when it comes to talking too much of the wrong kind of talk?
The right “wins”.
By virtue of FAUXNews alone.
Would you guys feel any better if you knew it was a Canadian targeting Palin and McCain? (The author claims to be Canadian)
It’s inappropriate when liberals do it too. However, there is a notable difference between a major leader in the GOP and someone random on youtube.
BIL,
Moving gunsights directed at the heads (including a sitting Senator) vs. marks on a map? There is no comparison.
BBB,
Note the title of the video.
It’s called “rebuttal” when you turn an opponent’s tactic against them.
Dennis Kucinich is only a menace if you’re a criminal in or formerly in government.
Or if you back criminals in government or formerly in government.
Here you go! This video has been up since March 2010.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3J74W0kBos&fs=1&hl=en_US]
BBB,
I am talking about the real world.
And I’ve worked as a bouncer myself. The job doesn’t require respect where none is due. It requires courtesy.
buckeye,
The Tea Part had roots before Palin ever got involved. Accepting Palin gave them media coverage. They would have been stupid not to accept her. She continues to serve as a fundraising tool for their movement. Like them or not, they hit the pavement running and have achieved phenominal success. There ability to go from being nonexistent to the powerhouse influence in the last election is something that will be discussed in poly-sci classes for years to come.
“I didn’t think they’d created it. I think Ms Palin, and those Republican and NRA members that follow her, like demagogues throughout our history have used it in an “I’m more patriotic than you’re patriotic” effort.”
Do you think the we’re a better team than they are is a novel idea? Welcome to Motivation 101. 🙂 Do I need embed a cheerleading video?
rafflaw,
BBB, You did not respond to my question about Palin removing the website page in question after the shooting.
Yes I did, I’ll repeat it for you.
“Get back to me when you have a question that I can answer without having to read the minds of others. The Palin Camp doesn’t consult me.”
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/01/12/palin-attacks-on-conservatives-at-tuscon-massacre-constitute-blood-libel/#comment-193085
Do you really expect me to tell you why people think the way they do, and then waste my time telling you why I might think they thought that way?
Why doesn’t JT respond to every question left on his comment section? I’m sure you have a closer connection with JT than I would with Palin (At least JT knows who you are :)).
If she really thought the cross hairs were surveyor marks, then why didn’t she respond accordingly months ago when people were criticizing her for them?
You keep overestimating my mindreading skills. Some days I’m happy to understand my motivation for doing what I choose to do.
I’ll add another question for you. Why did former Gov. Tim Pawlenty consider them crosshairs in a recent interview?
Why don’t you ask him? Should I expect him to be any less ignorant than the others who decided that the identifying marks are crosshairs?
Why did Palin Tweet her followers to check out the Facebook page that had the gunsights on them and tell them to “Don’t Retreat, instead RELOAD” ?
You’ll have to ask her.
Do you understand metaphores? Do you understand that the use of violent metaphores like “we’re gonna kill ’em tonight” have been around for a long time and the only time you find them being attributed to unlawful behavior is when it becomes a politically advantageous to do so?
When Barack Obama said at a 2008 fundraiser in Philadelphia,“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” he was hardly inciting violence. Yet when Palin uses the word reload, she must be talking about a gun, instead of “recouperate, reorganize, and repeat”.
“Kucinich get it. As in “all of”.
Kucinich for President – 2012”
not that little man whore, no way. he is a pig
The worst possible of anyone running. God help us all if he wins. And he reminds me of the smarmy politician in Demolition Man. He is 2 faced.
Well said Buckeye. How many times were the Dems called traitors when they tried to balk at increased off the budget funds for Iraq?
BBB
The Patriotism link with gun ownership is not something Palin, the Republicans, or even the NRA created. It goes back to 1787 and Alexander Hamilton (Federalist 28).
—————————————–
I didn’t think they’d created it. I think Ms Palin, and those Republican and NRA members that follow her, like demagogues throughout our history have used it in an “I’m more patriotic than you’re patriotic” effort.
As Samuel Johnson put it “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel”. I take that to mean when you have nothing else to offer, fall back “patriotism”.
I think Ms. Palin has little else to offer and that’s OK with Tea Party types. Little wonder she was one of the first for any blame to fall on. Little wonder she has offered nothing else since the tragedy, if that is the case.
One of the advantages of old age is the ability to recognize a real demagogue when one comes along after being exposed to enough of them.
Slart,
Thanks for catching that mistake!
BBB, You did not respond to my question about Palin removing the website page in question after the shooting. If she really thought the cross hairs were surveyor marks, then why didn’t she respond accordingly months ago when people were criticizing her for them? I’ll add another question for you. Why did former Gov. Tim Pawlenty consider them crosshairs in a recent interview?http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/01/gabrielle-giffords-tim-pawlenty-2012-presidential-race-/1 Here’s another question for you. Why did Palin Tweet her followers to check out the Facebook page that had the gunsights on them and tell them to “Don’t Retreat, instead RELOAD” ? http://twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA/statuses/10935548053# It is apparent from the language of her Facebook Page and the Tweet discussing the Facebook page that these symbols were considered by Palin to be gun sights. I can’t help it if she and Pawlenty don’t know the difference.
Buckeye,
“I find it interesting that you relied on Mr. Boortz instead of looking at the site yourself”
I followed your link before I found Boortz’ site.
Some of that gun-toting mama grizzly is what makes some people like her. I think those people are her base. She lives in Alaska, and she hunts (or she does now :)) I imagine she has received positive feedback from doing so, so she is probably encouraged by her handlers to keep doing it.
Guns in NYC => violence
Guns in Alaska => dinner
The Patriotism link with gun ownership is not something Palin, the Republicans, or even the NRA created. It goes back to 1787 and Alexander Hamilton (Federalist 28).
“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state…The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.”
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa28.htm
BIL,
You’re talking about respect on a blog. I don’t have a problem with that. I’m talking about respect in the real world.
While in college, I worked as a bouncer. If I would have adopted an attitude of no respect until earned, I problably would have ended up like so many others; getting my ass beat by some skinny little guy.
BBB
[I don’t have the time or the inclination to scour the web looking for the imagery used by every Democrat. I’ll leave that to the people who get paid to research it.
The only reason we’re even having this discussion is that Palin’s use of the imagery was attributed to the Arizona shootings without anything to support it. The blame for that lies with partisan journalists. I remember a time when journalists would lose their job for that kind of reporting.]
———————————————
I don’t have the time or the inclination to scour the web looking for the imagery used by every Democrat either, but being as anti-violence and fairly tuned in politically as I am, I think I’d have noticed if very much was available. I’ve already called out FL Grayson as a demogogic buffoon.
I find it interesting that you relied on Mr. Boortz instead of looking at the site yourself – as I did, but it’s late and you have a life as do I. It is only that relying on partisan non-journalists can lead one astray. It’s one of the reasons I look at the source of any stories on this website before commenting.
It’s possible that too many rely on non-journalists for information and that “partisan journalists” are not journalists at all and real journalists had little to do with attributing the shootings to Ms. Palin’s website. It’s difficult to determine at this late date.
The fact is that people have been bemoaning Ms. Palin’s tendency to glorify gun ownership and use (and the patriotism supposedly engendered thereby) for more than 2 years. Ever since she became the Republican nominee, in fact. It would be strange if even non-partisan journalists failed to make a connection before the facts were known. In fact all the facts are still unclear and it could even turn out the shooter was a rabid Palin fan.
If the politicians themselves have got the message, and I find Mr. Kucinich’s response hopeful, it may follow that the talk show circuit will find it uneconomical to continue exploiting the divisions. Hasn’t happened yet, but we can always hope.
It’s time to start letting the networks and politicians know that we’re fed up with it all and expect them to rein in their attack dogs. President Obama has received the most credit for being civil so far and that can’t go unnoticed by other pols. They can only hope their polls will rise as his did.