How Did You Love The Speech?

Obama gets some good reviews for his speech in the NY Times (and the sun rose in the east...).  Having read the speech, I am a bit of a non-believer - as with his condemnation of both Jeremiah Wright and his own grandmother or the criticism of left-winger Bill Ayers and offsetting righty Tom Coburn, Obama took his normal conciliatory tack of rebuking both sides and presenting himself as the calm man in the middle.

So to appease righties such as myself we heard Krugman seemingly tossed under the bus early in the speech:

Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world, and that terrible things happen for reasons that defy human understanding.  In the words of Job, "when I looked for light, then came darkness."  Bad things happen, and we must guard against simple explanations in the aftermath.
 
For the truth is that none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack.  None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped those shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man's mind.
 
So yes, we must examine all the facts behind this tragedy.  We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future.
 
But what we can't do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another.  As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility.  Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together.

Which is fine.  Yet a bit later the President adopts Krugman's message:

And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let's remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy, but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation, in a way that would make them proud.

So Krugman et al are wrong to blame the Tea Party and Sarah Palin but right that we all need to be more civil.  I don't think for a moment that the man who described his Republican counterparts as "hostage takers" includes himself among those who have lowered the tone, so I am reading this as a call to the right to pipe down. 

The NY Times editors apparently heard it the same way:

It was important that Mr. Obama transcend the debate about whose partisanship has been excessive and whose words have sown the most division and dread. This page and many others have identified those voices and called on them to stop demonizing their political opponents. The president’s role in Tucson was to comfort and honor, and instill hope.

Yeah, they know who the bad guys are, so the President didn't need to sully his hands.  Please.

NEVER MOVE ON:  Lectures on civility from the guy who flipped the bird to Hillary Clinton and John McCain during the 2008 campaign.  Whatever.

 

Comments

[Billy Jacques]

Your pro-Krugman quote was from the pre-released written speech: "...let's remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy, but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse..."

Per NRO (LUN), the actual section as Obama read it was "...let’s remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy, (it did not), but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse..."

The bolded text was the addition. Basically saying it was not a lack of civility that caused the shooting. So score zero for Freddy Krugman.

[clarice]

He was paying homage to the no mean words muddle. Since I am a co-czarina of the no mean words dept I cannot complain but I am working on a mailing list of those folks which should be worth a small fortune.

[bunkerbuster]

Again, Krugman et al don't blame the Tea Party. They make clear that no one knows whether or the extent to which heated anti-government, pro-gun rhetoric may have helped Loughner toward his massacre.
Rather, their point is that the massacre is a reminder that cheap demagoguery that portrays political opponents as enemies, rather than rivals, and which embraces the need for guns as an antidote to government overreach, has the potential to push unbalanced individuals over the edge.
Palin, like her Pavlovian devotees, responds with the strawman that we can't blame her for what a crazy man did. Indeed, she even takes it a step further, waxing on about how we can't transfer responsibility away from Loughner. But, again, no mainstream liberals are making any suggestion of that. Rather they are simply saying that we shouldn't be surprised if the paranoid style of politics practiced by the American right ends up pushing the insane to commit atrocities like Loughner's.
Fortunately, Obama demonstrated clearly the contrast between his habits of mind and Palin's. Where she insisted on making herself the victim and put herself front and center, Obama spoke only of what's best for the country and what we, as Americans, can and should do to at least try to prevent this from happening again.

[Baraq Hussein]

The best way to prevent this is to have the crazed lefties who hate America and the libs in Congress who defy the wishes of the American people, keep their pieholes shut.

Remember, as my grandpappy Mugumbi used to say "get in their faces of those who disagree with you and don't bring a knife to a gun fight"

[Baraq Hussein]

Obviously my grandpappy didn't have the best grasp of the English language.

[buster]

@bunkerbuster,

"Palin, like her Pavlovian devotees..."

I fear that your cheap demagoguery could push an insane person to commit atrocities. Please refrain from ever posting on the internet again, lest your paranoid politics send an unbalanced person over the edge.

I'm not trying to shut you up and de-legitimize your arguments. I'm just doing what I can to prevent this from happening again.

[buster]

"They make clear that no one knows whether or the extent to which heated anti-government, pro-gun rhetoric may have helped Loughner toward his massacre."

It's only unknowable if you commit the fallacy of arguing from ignorance--by demanding that we prove that anti-government, pro-gun etc. DIDN'T instigate the massacre.

Unless you accept rank question begging, Krugman and his fellow gollums deserve all the scorn they receive over this.

[Wont Back Down]

I'm cranking the rhetoric up to 11! What are you going to do about it?

[TC@LeatherPenguin]

@bunkerbuster,
"Where she insisted on making herself the victim and put herself front and center, ..."

Really? Her mind control powers coerced all those people, like Kos, young Matt et al to pin the blame on her before any of the victim's were even in the emergency room??

[Captain Hate]

Bammy Lie #1 per the Tucson Sentinal:

Giffords is in a drug-induced coma in intensive care. Doctors frequently awaken her to check her responsiveness, and she could open her eyes and respond to simple commands Sunday—an encouraging sign, said Rhee said.

Despite Giffords' ability to follow commands, "We know that brain swelling can take a turn, so we remain cautiously optimistic,” said Lemole.

He described simple commands as: "can you open your eyes?" or "can you raise two fingers." Such simple tasks can tell doctors much about her condition, he said.

Giffords cannot speak because she is on a ventilator, and cannot see because of the area of her injury and the surgery requires her eyes be kept closed, the doctors said.

Pretty embarrassing to lie about an injured woman in a nationally televised forum to make you and your political allies look better.

[bunkerbuster]

Penquin: as I've explained, no one blamed it on Palin. Rather, the point has been that we shouldn't be surprised when insane people react to incendiary rhetoric in violent ways. Nor has anyone I'm aware of singled out Palin. Rather, all have been careful to name a range of sources, including Palin.
It's pretty funny how tangled up in their own strawmen wingnuts get. The idea that Sara Palin is to blame is a conservative fantasy, not a liberal one.

Buster: The evidence is that Loughner is insane. Given that, we have no reliable way of knowing what actually motivated him.
There is no more a way to prove he wasn't motivated by wingnuttery than to prove he was.
The Youtube vids and other evidence give no evidence as to whether, for example, he felt he should do something to prevent the anti-immigration law from being overturned.
Perhaps he will make some sort of statement in court, but even then, we really couldn't be sure, given the state of his mind.
It seems pretty obvious he might try to blame this or that political sentiment, whether or not that's actually the case.

[Porchlight]

Obama is back, baby. Campaign 2012 is off to a great start!

[Porchlight]

Penquin: as I've explained, no one blamed it on Palin.

Kos tweet just after the news of the shootings broke: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin!"

[bunkerbuster]

Why do Tea Partiers prefer Gadsden's flag to Old Glory?

[Melinda Romanoff]

Damn!

Who spilled all the whitewash around here?

You can put down a drop cloth instead of being in such a hurry.

Sheesh. Now I have to go change shoes...

[narciso]

So let see, that makes Bedell, Stack, Bishop, Lee, Duke (up in Northern Fl) and now Loughner, fellow progressives) or say non conservatives who have reacted in anger.
I think Sarah's message made him refocus his own,

[boris]

"Why do Tea Partiers ..."

Bubu's new "who me" tone ...

[Rob Crawford]

Penquin: as I've explained, no one blamed it on Palin.

Is Pravda, no?

[boris]

"prefer Gadsden's flag to Old Glory?"

Why don't you burn one and find out?

[Rob Crawford]

Who spilled all the whitewash around here?

Whitewash doesn't smell like that...

[Melinda Romanoff]

I'm over here. That's the milk shed.

[Rob Crawford]

Bungbuster, I think you need to take time away from the 'nets. Now, it's entirely possible you're paid to do this -- and your volte face as to blame for the madman makes that quite likely -- but if so, you should consider a new line of work.

If this is your hobby, well, you suck at it.

[Soylent Red]

Look folks...blame is the Left's only card to play. It's not like you can look to the record of the Most Enlightened and Compassionate Siddartha Hussein Obama, or the gleaming history of Progressivism in curing the world's ills. Like every totalitarian fascist strain before them, Progressivism MUST have a scapegoat. So to suggest that you can change your attitude and change the world (even if you were inclined to), is a lie. Nothing short of total buy-in to everything they say and advocate will be good enough.

You know the common mantra of the Left now...if only conservatives weren't mean, then Progressive thought would usher in a new age of peace and wisdom; if only Sarah Palin didn't publish any words or pictures, the unenlightened masses wouldn't be driven to acts of violence; the Party of No! We must spend more but Republicans hate the poor/environment/children/old people/the sick/the crazy/black people/New Orleans/etc.!

And the worst part of it is, when the message of "tolerence" comes up as the campaign theme, squishes like Lowry and Peggers and Krauthammer (not to mention a fair proportion of the Republican political establishement) will dislocate themselves to get their lips around the Great Obamic Johnson. Because there is nothing worse to a ruling elite, NOTHING, than being a mean person who is "intolerant".

And remember, they consider themselves (especially preachy Obama) as the arbiters of morality and justice. So "intolerant" means "intolerant of whatever Progressivism says is moral and right." That means that until you change your entire worldview to agree with The One, i.e. your moral imaginations, you will be targeted by them for ridicule and hatred. Period.

So stop worrying and embrace it (and encourage your Congresscritters to do the same). You know you're doing something right when they fly into these kinds of rages of vitriol.

[narciso]

Actually Pravda called and said 'stop it you're embarassing yourself' for one thing, it's imminently more nationalist that the counterpart papers.

[Steve C.]

Calling himself out for using "hostage takers" to describe the Republicans would have been a good start.

We'll see if the physician can heal himself.

[Porchlight]

Exactly right, Soylent.

[PD]

Why do Tea Partiers prefer Gadsden's flag to Old Glory?

I'd think you would have better things to do with your time than be a complete idiot.

[Rob Crawford]

It's the speed of the MiniTru that astounds, not its extent.

It's like the movie "Dark City" -- they go to sleep and the world rearranges itself around them. Afterward, the way it was never existed.

[PD]

Jobless Claims in U.S. Rose 35,000 Last Week to 445,000

Odd ... I didn't see the word "unexpected" in the Bloomberg story.

[Melinda Romanoff]

PD-

Don't look at the Non-Seasonally Adjusted figures.

[Janet]

Wonderful example from Zombie via Instapundit of media bias..."They went to the vigil to report on a “respectful” event, and by golly they were going to bring back a report about a “respectful” event, regardless of what actually occurred. That’s how subtle media bias can be — simply switching off the camera when inconvenient things start happening."

For years we have been manipulated by the MFM. The pictures in newspapers & on the evening news of immigration, anti-war, gay, abortion rights rallies never show the whole picture. Thank God for the internet.

[Melinda Romanoff]

Janet-

That's why I'm beginning to think the whole rhetoric meme was a set up for the speech.

I'm feeling very "had".

[Drider]

Hey, it was a nice speech, unfortunately it came from Obama who is the single biggest offender of inciting the masses in the country.
The guy just does it over and over and over again.There is no need to list his hateful rhetoric, the list is long and everyone has heard just about all of it.

Pretty words coming from his mouth ring hollow and aways have and always will.

[Janet]

And remember, they consider themselves (especially preachy Obama) as the arbiters of morality and justice. So "intolerant" means "intolerant of whatever Progressivism says is moral and right."

Yeah, like Porchlight, I totally agree. What is really sickening with progressives is that they want me to obey whatever they say...but they don't live it themselves. They have become the hypocritical TV preacher living large & having an affair while preaching helping the poor & morality.

[sam]

If the leftards and their media cohorts don't blame Palin for everything, what else are they going to talk about?

$3.25/gal gas? 9.5% unemployment?

[Captain Hate]

Peter King is on Laura Ingraham defending his ignorant knee-jerk reaction by proposing a stupid bill that puts him and his ilk on a pedestal compared to us normal folks. To her credit, Laura is skewering him on pointing out that Loughner and his ilk don't give a rat's ass about laws and this is just reflexive garbage.

King seems to be pretty smart in other comments; I don't know why he's being so obtuse on this matter.

[Soylent Red]

I anxiously await Howard Dean, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Harry Reid, Krugmann, and Barney Frank to heed the call of their Master's Voice.

Their mean words are making me feel sad on the inside and inhibiting my moral imaginations. My immoral imaginations too. And that's saying something, because like Han Solo, "I can imagine a lot."

**sob**

[Appalled]

I look at the transcript of the speech, and feel like giving it a C. The approach of not blaming anyone, but "hey, if we decide to be more civil, that's good" straddles the fine line between clever and stupid. Since I think this President actually believes that an America where Walter Cronkite tells us "That's The Way It Is" every night is a better America, this is likely the best you're going to get from him.

I would have preferred a more ringing endorsement of the 1st Amendment, but this President has likely never had a Libertarian impulse in his life. So, a C. This wasn't an epic fail. More an epic Meh.

[clarice]

Great, Soylent.

Capt. Maybe she should ask him if the protection should extend to Sarah and ask how many dath threats he's received lately. Apparently she's received very many --there are even websites and twitters on that subject (See Legal Insurrection for details).

King is a fool for making that proposal and sticking to it.

[Porchlight]

Well now, if Appalled gives it a C, I feel justified now in having given it a D-. :)

Just kidding Appalled. I'm thrilled you didn't give it an A like the rest of the yammering dopes.

[Soylent Red]

More an epic Meh.

Why should this be any different than the rest of his resume?

[Porchlight]

like the rest of the yammering dopes.

which is not to say that you're a yammering dope. ;) I'm thinking of the chumps on Fox, HotAir, etc.

[Threadkiller]

--"King seems to be pretty smart in other comments; I don't know why he's being so obtuse on this matter."--

He is afraid of CAIR after his comments regarding the GZM. That is all I can figure.

[Ada @ Israel]

As for me this speech of President doesn't seem to be so brilliant but from my point of view it's so because there's nothing to be said about the tragedy actually. All these are only words and the worst has already happened.

[Captain Hate]

I love the MSLSD "conservatives" that are gushing about Toonces: Nooner, Scarblowhard.... Nope I didn't see that coming::eyeroll::

Based on what I saw, I'll agree with Appalled's grade of C.

[Captain Hate]

Clarice I think he responded to what Palin's endured. He came off very well except for that dumbass proposed law; TK's comment about being mauled by the CAIR bears might be blinding him to what the rest of us see.

[DebinNC]

The current Congressional leadership is a tremendous blessing imo. Compare our side with theirs and take heart that Mr. Triangulator is stuck fast to those miscreants...and we're no longer shackled to lightning rods like Gingrich and DeLay or potted plants like Hastert and Lott. Obama is "itchin to fight" but it takes two to tango. Unfortunately for him, our guys aren't showboats whose egos override their brains. They're principled plodders. They're the turtles to his hare. And I'm so grateful.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

I see Leo co-opted my name again last night. As everyone knows I never post after 10 PM and as I got an email asking if his remarks about Palin were mine, I will point out they are not.

And I warned Cleo in the other thread that as a result of Loughner it will become easier to institutionalize crazy people, and he is on the top of my list.

Hi Soylent! Where are you now?

[Captain Hate]

Btw, Loughner's high school educational experience was at the Ayers' Small School Workshop affiliate in Tucson. Another Billy Bombthrower success story for which there will be no negative consequences; guilty as hell and free as a bird!!!

[Captain Hate]

Don't worry Jane; we can recognize when Cleo Loughner Semantic soopergenius is socking you

[Rob Crawford]

King seems to be pretty smart in other comments; I don't know why he's being so obtuse on this matter.

He's apparently a long-time gun-grabber. Something like a D with the NRA.

[narciso]

Meanwhile the race for RNC chair, seems like a bad three stooges sketch, with Cino and Priebus, having supported Obamacare, Anuzis
supporting National popular vote?, I'd support
Kodos again,

[MarkO]

It was no more than a merely average speech, given in circumstances that were unseemly to the occasion. But, then again, it wasn't a memorial; it had a title, t-shirts and rodeo behavior. It quacked rally, which it was. Imagine Obama imitating Clinton. The irony. The horror.

But, Obama showed he wants to be re-elected and what he did, by seeming to be calm and rational in the face of lefty hysteria, will help him with independents.

Those of us who want him out in two years cannot expect him to make mistakes every day. And, we cannot delude ourselves that everything he does is a mistake, even if we can find no good in him.

He's not that smart and he's a liar.

[Threadkiller]

Why does Bungduster feel compelled to "insert" himself into these threads?

Bung, have you given up on reading links?

Obama's proposed ">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SwHKql3dKc&feature=related"> funeral procession for the victims.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Penquin: as I've explained, no one blamed it on Palin.

Oh, bullshit.

"Mission accomplished, Palin!"
"Palin has blood on her hands!"
"Someone should shoot Sarah Palin"

Selective memory is not an argument.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

I actually agree with whoever said, it was a good speech, too long, in the wrong venue 4 days late.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

BTW what do you guys think of the allegation that Krugman's job was to tee it up for Obama so he could move to the middle?

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

I've now had 2 posts in a row disappear. Does anyone see them?

[Threadkiller]

I see three in a row.

[Danube of Thought]

Here's what puzzles me: we have now reached a consensus of rare dimension that incivility in our public discourse had absolutely nothing to do with this killing spree.

Why, then, do so many people accept uncritically the notion that the shooting should be an occasion for re-examining the issue of civility in our public discourse?

[Threadkiller]

Because of the lack of civility after the shooting, DoT?

[Rob Crawford]

Because of the lack of civility after the shooting, DoT?

Except the most uncivil after the shooting are oddly exempt from the lists of those whose rhetoric needs examination.

[Captain Hate]

BTW what do you guys think of the allegation that Krugman's job was to tee it up for Obama so he could move to the middle?

I think it ignores too many other witless things Paulie Peanuts has written.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

I really think we should be calling for Krugman to lose his job.

[MarkO]

Another fine rhetorical question, DoT.

[Captain Hate]

I've thought the same thing, Jane, but I'm convinced that Pinch will keep MoDo, Paulie and Rich after he has to let all the real reporters go.

[glenda]

Soylent !!!!!!!!! Really nice to read your thoughts :)...

IMHO, King just doesn't want HIS constituents to carry, I think he understands deep down, this would
never fly.

clarice..if that was you @Rubin's Washpost commenting yesterday..parry--thrust--score!!

[clarice]

I don't , DoT. In fact, I think the more heated the discussion the better.

[Melinda Romanoff]

Jane-

Don't you find having a punching bag convenient? ( and steadily reduced to a laughing stock along with the institution that maintains his soapbox?)

I say give him another microphone and underpowered amplifier.

[Jack is Back!]

Boortz said this morning that if you compare Palin's "blood libel" remarks on camera to Obama's remarks last night its game, set, Match = Obama. Further compariing the two tells him that the Republicans will make a mistake nominating her because she is no match for Obama.

I didn't hear or see the pep rally last night since I was convinced it would be Wellstone redux, which I guess is what it turned out to be. What do the JOM audience think of the two sets of remarks and how it affects your thinking regarding that matchup if it should occur?

[MayBee]

Why, then, do so many people accept uncritically the notion that the shooting should be an occasion for re-examining the issue of civility in our public discourse?

It's just another point in a long line of calling for civility. IIRC, Obama became famous in 2004 for making a speech with basically the same theme.
As we've all seen, it isn't really about civility at all. It's about not making a strong argument against his policies.

[Ignatz]

--Again, Krugman et al don't blame the Tea Party. They make clear that no one knows whether or the extent to which heated anti-government, pro-gun rhetoric may have helped Loughner toward his massacre.--

That's what is so execrable about their blood libel. Krugman and the other big fish liars don't have the guts to point blank accuse Palin or their other "enemies" they wish to punish of causing it. They first state a cynical, disingenuous disclaimer, that no one knows precisely what set Loughner off, and then insinuate, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, that in fact they're pretty darn sure what did.
And your approval of that despicable tactic, which was usually even beneath Joe McCarthy, demonstrates a lot more about you than you apparently realize.

[boris]

"compare Palin's "blood libel" remarks on camera to Obama's remarks"

Pretty sure no mainstream pundits were blaming Obama for inciting the murders. Apples oranges.

[MayBee]

Boortz said this morning that if you compare Palin's "blood libel" remarks on camera to Obama's remarks last night its game, set, Match = Obama.

I don't recall another time when the President of the United States's speech was so often to the videotaped remarks of a former politician. Do you?

[MayBee]

Anti-government rhetoric like "Loose Change"? His friends have said he was a big fan of that movie.
Perhaps Bush should have banned it.

[Ignatz]

--Further compariing the two tells him that the Republicans will make a mistake nominating her because she is no match for Obama.--

How can you compare the two?
One was a person defending herself from calumny, the other was a guy pretending to stand above the fray caused by his comrades and cohorts committing the calumny.
Reverse the roles and see how they do.

[narciso]

Boortz has been contemptuous of her in the past, no big surprise, maybe somebody should accuse him of inciting mass murder, and see how gracious he can be, I recall he caught some flak for his comments during Katrina,

Why do people 'nominally' on our side, contort themselves into pretzels to attack
her, do they think that will make them immune, in the LUN

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

I miss Boortz point. I thought Palin's remarks were eloquent, sober and true and I thought Obama spoke too long at a pep rally.

AS for a match-up the winner will be who is hated less. The people who hate Palin on the right won't vote and the people who hate Obama on the left won't vote.

I'm not convinced she can beat him, but my admiration for her grows daily - and I've always liked her.

Aside: On Monday I was having dinner with a wealthy business owner who made it clear she hated Palin. I asked why. She had a hard time and finally said - because "she quit her job". I asked her if she hated Obama for quitting his job as a Senator to become president. She said she didn't vote for him so she didn't know that.

How do you win that battle?

[Janet]

After the State of the Union there is always a video response from the other party. The video messages always seem weaker. No audience, just a straight reading of a statement.

[Ignatz]

--Already we’ve seen a national conversation commence, not only about the motivations behind these killings, but about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental health systems.--

That left wing euphemism turned me off from the start. After years of proudly proclaiming themselves gun control freaks the left finally gave up and have tried for sometime to rebrand themselves in favor of 'gun safety' which means exactly the same thing as gun control. It hasn't caught on and the only people that use it are committed leftists.
Should be like fingernails on a chalkboard to anyone who likes their freedom.

[Captain Hate]

How do you win that battle?

You can't because it's something so deep seated that she can't articulate it convincingly. I remarked yesterday that there's a lot of incoherent hate for Palin for some reason by erstwhile "conservatives". I don't know why it exists but it might be the inverse of why I find her so attractive as a candidate.

[clarice]

If Palin weren't so gorgeous I am sure more people wouldn't be so viscerally hateful. Honestly. A strong beautiful woman seems to make a lot of people nuts.Men as well as women.

Add to that those who have bought into the decades long view of the right as a thundering horde of cretins and you have the base of her detractors.

OT But Ohio has now joined the suit against Obamacare and that means 1/2 of the states are suing to stop it. That is Obama and Pelosi's real legacy--not getting Giffords to open her eyes.

More here
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/01/12/half-of-all-states-now-suing-to-stop-obamacare/> 25=1/2 of the states Obama

[Jack is Back!]

I am only telling you all what Boortz said. I have no opinion since I didn't hear the speech. But Boortz is a libertarian and is always looking on the dark side. For a whole year in 2007 to the lead up to 2008 elections he was convinced HIllary would be the next President because of the single, young, white, female vote and he never saw Obama coming. Now he is convinced that Palin just won't stand up against Obama. For some reason he suffers from "reverse psychology" type self-fullfilling prophecies. I think he is taking this line hoping it turns out to be the opposite of what will happen.

Expect the worst, be pleasantly surprised.

[Rick Ballard]

The knowledge that the murderer was merely exercising his own brand of "moral imagination" was in hand within hours of the shooting. You can follow the dissemination of that knowledge via the tone of the reporting in the MFM. It was Sheriff Dipstick, with the full knowledge that the murderer was a drugged out nutter, who promulgated incivility as a causative factor.

The President had the knowledge that the Sheriff was lying through his, hopefully, rotting teeth by the end of day one and said nothing to ward off the incivility of his beloved deranged left wing base. The President did not remain mute for four days out of ignorance.

IMO - a 'C' is pretty generous for the pap served up last night and ignoring the election campaign venue selection and the T-shirts when evaluating the commie's "performance" is a mark of servility, not civility. I've never "played nice" with slavers and I'm not starting today.

[clarice]

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/01/12/half-of-all-states-now-suing-to-stop-obamacare/>25 + 1/2 of the states, Obama

[Sandy Daze]

13 Jan 11
CONUS

Listened earlier today to the Bill Bennett Morning in America, which we normally find a useful and not-overly bombastic voice. Today one of the guests was Mona Charon. The Palin video became a topic, After both proclaimed the absolute impossibility of Palin to be elected President, Charon intoned that Palin was way too exposed and that Palin had failed to heed her (Charon's) advice at the end of the 2008 campaign, to 'go back to Alaska, govern and ((get out of our lives))' Bennett, for his part believed that there was no need for the Palin video, as she had already been appropriately defended by others. Both were certain that Palin consumes too much of the political oxygen and should just disappear.

I doubt either watched the video--I did (on my brand-new HTC EVO, one heckuva smartphone)--and I think it was a very presidential address, all things being considered.

And, when one considers, for example, the hate, the SCREAMING HATE as documented at Patterico, and other locations, one wonders if there has ever been a politician or even a private person who has had so much invective directed at her or him.

Perhaps it harkens back to primal urges of a male wanting to protect a female, or perhaps it is a matter of supporting the underdog, or perhaps it is simply the right thing to do--whatever, the more Palin is attacked, the stronger my support for her becomes.

Aside from bloggers, has there been anyone in an official (elected, current or former) capacity who has spoken in defense of her?

Take good care,
Sandy

[Janet]

The knowledge that the murderer was merely exercising his own brand of "moral imagination" was in hand within hours of the shooting.

Great line.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

Wait - aren't there 57 states?

[Danube of Thought]

I think the more heated the discussion the better

So do I--and it's pretty much always been like this.

[Sue]

My local talk radio host is noticing that there was a record of her opening her eyes last Sunday. And the newspaper that had that story has now scrubbed it from their website.

[Appalled]

MayBee makes the appropriate point, here. Obama is President -- he had better sound Presidential (and he did). Palin -- who, in most circumstances, would have made a simple statement along the lines of her first statement, was directly blamed for creating the climate for the shooting by a large number of commentators. She responded -- as Palin often does - with a mostly unremarkable statement with a single remarkable phrase. That phrase -- like Death Panels -- is going to stay with us, and is going to be in the back of the mind of anyone who sees talk radio being blamed for a climate of anger. (Neil Boortz ought to be grateful for that -- as his show is Exhibit F or G on what Obama has in mind when he longs for a more civil discussion of the issues.)

[Sue]

I see Drudge is reporting it too.

[MarkO]

Anyone with a tiny awareness of American history would know that today's political climate is relatively calm.

[Danube of Thought]

They make clear that no one knows whether or the extent to which heated anti-government, pro-gun rhetoric may have helped Loughner toward his massacre.--

Funny they don't bother to make it clear that no one knows whether or the extent to which heated ant-white, anti-American, anti-gun rhetoric may have helped Lougner toward his massacre.

The supporting evidence in each case carries identical weight.

[DebinNC]

the more Palin is attacked, the stronger my support for her becomes

Maybe it's a Southern thing, but I can remember when men wouldn't swear in the presence of a woman. If a woman was found to have overhead the swearing, an abject apology immediately followed. Publicly denigrating a woman, much less swearing at her, was inconceivable. Chivalry is not dead, but it's certainly no longer the norm. That's one reason among many that 2 million kids are now homeschooled.

[MarkO]

There's no hearsay here, because none of it is offered for truth.

[Jack is Back!]

This business of Obama healing Giffords is so much like Mathew's version of the gospel that it is eerie and scary at the same time. Then they had Gildebrand and that skank Wasserman-Shutlz on F&F this morning claiming that they were there when she opened her eyes and tried to speak to them. What phooey if you listen to the doctors for the last few days. So, for the left and the Dems to deny that there is no politicalizing of this event is absurb and a downright corruptible lie. Instead of the FCC reinstituting the "fariness doctrine" perhaps we should create a new law that prohibits any politician, anywhere from appearing on radio, TV or print media within 72 hours of a murder anywhere in the world. Also, applies to Nobel Prize winners and newspaper editorial boards.

[Swibbie]

"Rather they are simply saying that we shouldn't be surprised if the paranoid style of politics practiced by the American right ends up pushing the insane to commit atrocities like Loughner's"

Bunkerbuster, this is such a stupid argument, but it seems to be the tact you lefties take since you lost the "blame Sarah" game.

This no evidence, none, nada, zero, zilch, that rhetoric caused this left-wing nut job to start shooting people. Yet you people are saying it "could have been, so let's take this opportunity to curtail more free speech". What a strange, upside down world you live in. It's so shallow and superficial that it would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous.

[BB Key]

Did BO walk on water after he opened Gabby's eyes ?