Within minutes of the first reports Saturday that Representative Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona Democrat, and a score of people with her had been shot in Tucson, pages began disappearing from the Web. One was Sarah Palin’s infamous “cross hairs” map from last year, which showed a series of contested Congressional districts, including Ms. Giffords’s, with gun targets trained on them. Another was from Daily Kos, the liberal blog, where one of the congresswoman’s apparently liberal constituents declared her “dead to me” after Ms. Giffords voted against Nancy Pelosi in House leadership elections last week.
This lede sums up the absurdity of he-said/she-said journalism and stupidly cynical “everybody does it” analysis in a few short words.
If we have to talk about Sarah Palin, let’s at least have some honest analysis. Sarah Palin’s career, which was already sputtering, just took a major nose-dive, because she’s inextricably tied to that map. There was never any justification for that disgusting piece of imagery, and there’s no easy way for her to explain it away.
dmsilev
If the closest equivalency that can be drawn is between Sarah Palin and “anonymous commenter on blog” (not even “anonymous blogger”), then perhaps someone should explain to Mr. Bai that *there is no equivalency*.
Sigh.
dms
DougJarvus Green-Ellis
And to think David Gergen confused him with Matt Taibbi.
arguingwithsignposts
I’ll just repeat again – a 9-year-old is dead today. fuck. fuck. fuck these fuckers.
zattarra
OMG the false equivalency here. They are contorting themselves to try to find left/right balance. Sara Palin, former Governor and Vice Presidential candidate for the Republican Party, Fox News political analyst and national celebrity’s web-site and paid political activities are apparently the exact same thing as a comment on DailyKos.
Wow, Matt Bai and the New York Times better try not to break anything the contortions they are trying.
El Cid
Apparently this was the DKos diary in question, and the response given.
Make of it what you will.
cathyx
What a great reporter he is. He finds a way to implicate both sides in this issue. And they are exactly the same in their rhetoric. A crosshairs map with gun targets trained on the now dead person, and a quote that she’s dead to me. See? Both sides are equally guilty.
Alex S.
This is grasping at the last straw. Declaring someone “dead to me” isn’t even violent language. It’s not inciting violence, it’s more an announcement of ignoring everything this person is going to say. And noone would act because of this statement because that guy is just a nameless blogger, and Palin was a candidate for vice-president. This incident should highlight Palin’s reckless irresponsiblity.
Rick Massimo
Evidently, that was a user diary that the user deleted him or herself.
I’m sure Bai spent all fucking day looking for something – ANYTHING – to put in his lead about “the left.”
And honestly, if you can’t tell the difference between declaring someone “dead to me” and putting a gun target on a map of their state, and if you can’t tell the difference between some DKos user and someone still considered to be seriously in the mix for the 2012 GOP nomination – well, then you probably can’t tie your shoes in the morning. But if you can PRETEND you can’t tell the difference, then give the New York Times a call, because you’re just what they’re looking for.
Gene in Princeton
Bai is such a tool.
funluvn
Agreed mistermix.
The crazies will double down and continue to play the “both sides do it” meme, which is all over the insipid RedStateHate site, and the media will follow that and stand with them.
Either way, Palin just became marginalized even beyond her simple minded / star burst followers.
Anya
Matt Bai, should be run out of town with ridicule and mockery. Instead he will be invited to appear at Morning Joe, tomorrow to attempt, the impossible task, of equating a nameless, faceless commenter at Daily Kos to a former Governor and a VP candidate who wields an unmatched influence in the Republican Party (at least until yesterday). The MSM is more toxic than the teabaggers and all their hysteria and racism. Fuck them!
stuckinred
I thought Palin put the map back up?
terraformer
This is yet another benefit of media consolidation: its minions can be very effective at messaging when things like this happen to ensure that low-information people who will nonetheless undoubtedly hear about this tragedy will buy into the ‘both sides do it’ meme that applies to all things.
My personal cynicism meter regarding the MSM’s handling of this immediately went into overdrive within minutes of first hearing about it. I knew that pieces just like Bai’s would be forthcoming, and we can expect more of the same in the days to come. They will inculcate the idea that this is nothing more than a crazy person, and leave out deeper, past-due, and more difficult discussions of not only political blame, but also the ubiquitous-ness of guns, intolerance, bellicosity, etc. that a healthy society might contemplate.
Rick Taylor
I can live the false equivalency in this case. When the he is an obscure blogger and the she is the former candidate for the Vice President of the Republican party whose pronouncements get regular discussion on tv, no one who reads that and hasn’t already made up their mind is going to be taken in. If finding that passage gave Matt the cover he needed to write that, then the result is overall positive.
snowbird42
But the tone on KOS is hate filled. I have left the site.
There have been way too many over the top comments.
Matt
I read that last night and wanted to scream. Comparing Sarah Palin’s crosshairs graphic to a random DKos diarist? Sure, anything you say, Matt Bai.
JPL
On Meet The Press a tea party representative from Idaho said there is vitriol on both sides. Look at the nasty talk against poor previous president Bush.
Omnes Omnibus
If “dead to me” is violent rhetoric, then we should also avoid “fuck off and die,” “take a long walk off a short pier,” “go play in traffic,” “DIAF,” and “I hope you choke on it.”
maryQ
Just so we’re all on the same page here:
Daily Kos commenter = Presidential front-runner and former VP nominee of one of the two major political parties
“dead to me” = “Don’t retreat-RELOAD” with a picture of Gifford’s district in the crosshairs.
I too find the majority of Kos comments annoying, immature and yes, sometimes vitriolic. Which is why, if I am ever a 72 year old cancer survivor, running for President, I will not select a Daily Kos commenter as my running mate.
Villago Delenda Est
Jon Stewart, bless him, engages in this idiotic false equivalency shit too. The response from the left to the rhetoric of the right is in no way equivalent.
As for Matt Bai, the poor dear has been brought up in the he said/she said school of “even handed” journamalism that infests our national discourse like a virulent, malignant cancer.
ppcli
Wow. We need to save this one. Mr. Bai of the Even-The-Liberal-NY_Times has achieved an astonishing feat of pure MSM journalism. The Joe DiMaggio 56 game hitting streak of Serious Person pronouncing. The Cullinan diamond of establishment opinion shaping.
On one hand, you have a former governor and vice-presidential candidate with a TV show and constant press attention who repeatedly talks about “reloading” rather than retreating and other explicitly martial rhetoric. Similarly, her allies talk about “second amendment solutions” and hold fundraisers at firing ranges, talking about “taking aim at” Giffords etc. She puts out a map with a cross-hairs on Giffords among others. On the other hand, some nobody in an enormous posting site said Giffords was dead to her. So both sides do it.
No mere typist he.
PS
@Omnes Omnibus: Well, maybe that wouldn’t be such a bad idea. I tend to agree with Rick Taylor@14. I want the right wing to tone down the rhetoric, and frankly I don’t much care about the intermediate steps. I do not expect Boehner to admit guilt, for example, but I do want to give him the chance to demonstrate leadership. I admit, I’m tempted to add a snarky kicker to that sentence, but I’m withholding it. One step at a time, let’s aim for a discourse in which we can disagree without excessive insult.
Maude
@Villago Delenda Est:
Bai is like the kid that talks behind your back and is nice to your face. He’s scared of confronting anyone. Reality is very hard for him.
C. Gallagher
This video interview with Giffords demonstrates everything wrong with our “both sides now” media, and everything right about her.
KCinDC
Apparently the new defense is that they’re not gun sights, but surveyor’s symbols. Wonder how long it took them to come up with that one.
nitpicker
Fuck Matt Bai.
Yes, because the signs of a few people at rallies and random folks on the internet is the same as a party-wide move toward violent rhetoric that included congresspersons themselves.
PeakVT
The false equivalence is annoying, not to mention misleading. According to this list, right-wing terrorists have killed far more people than left-wing terrorists in the US over the past two decades (though Islamic-related terrorists far outpace both). If it weren’t for fucktards in the ELF and splinter animal rights groups, there would essentially be no terrorism that could be labeled left-wing for at least the past decade.
Omnes Omnibus
@KCinDC:I did not know that one could reload a theodolite.
beltane
Anyone peddling the “both sides do it” claim is nothing more than an apologist and facilitator for the far-right. In 2011, both sides do not do it, and both sides have not been doing it for at least the past 30 years. There is only one side that does it now, let us at least be honest about that.
The false equivalency crowd exists solely to provide cover for the right while further silencing the left. I am now convinced that there is no act of violence so heinous that the Matt Bais of the world won’t seek to excuse or justify it.
PTirebiter
Sure there was. Dehumanizining your opponent has long been a key component of the GOP’s candidate handbook. Winning votes is the only justification required. Palin wasn’t targeting a valued human life, she was merely suggesting that a second amendment solution might be appropriate for a liberal infestation problem.
PeakVT
@KCinDC: Sweet FSM, that is such a bad lie.
Chances of the media calling them on it? I’d say less than 10%.
schrodinger's cat
Ever since Sarah Palin burst on the national scene and gave her speech at the Republican Convention, she has incited hate. Remember that pit bull with lipstick speech. All our beltway media did was fawn. For them politics is a spectator sport. They loved her and were falling over each other to sing her praises. Her rhetoric has been ugly since day 1 and she has been goading her supporters to violence by talking about ”real” Americans and Obama palling around with terrorists. It was just a matter of time before something like what happened yesterday happened. It was a matter of when not if. She and others who have created this climate of hate and who prey on people’s fears and appeal to their basest instincts. Surely they take some of the blame for yesterday’s attempted assassination. A sitting Congresswoman was shot, a terrorist act, meant to strike fear in the heart of political opponents and those who are not “real” Americans.
ETA: The media is not doing its job, they are like the courtiers at the Versailles, very attached to their perks, hardly bothered about reporting the facts. They cover politics as if it were a circus.
xian
@funluvn:
no, it’s the media playing both sides do it.
the crazies have doubled-down by stating that the shooter was a left-wing liberal and obama supporter.
jonas
Of course if you do enough googling through DKos or Dem Underground, you’re going to find some posts with inappropriate imagery or language about your political opponents, or something.
What the MSM is failing to grasp is the difference between a small number of blowhards posting on a partisan website and the political rhetoric of an entire party establishment on the Right. Yes, there are some jerks at Kos’s place. They don’t run major cable networks, or have multimillion-dollar PACS putting their message out there. You don’t have Democratic candidates using eliminationist rhetoric in their fundraising material, attacking and delegitimizing democratic government, or styling themselves as guerilla fighters ready to “take down” their opponents by any means necessary.
Villago Delenda Est
@PTirebiter:
Anyone familiar with military theory knows that dehumanizing an opponent is key to getting your soldiers, who have been socialized since birth not to kill, to, in fact, kill. “Rebels”, “Yankees”, “Injuns”, “Huns”, “Krauts”, “Japs”, “Gooks”, “Hadjiis”. Long history of it.
Bobbo
I wonder how much this will actually hurt Palin (if she wasn’t already sinking anyway). She thrives on victimization, and if there is a way to make hay out of this with “the haters on the left accused me of inciting violence,” she will find it.
Davis X. Machina
@KCinDC: It’s one of those things that’s true, but meaningless.
The actual icon used in composing the graphic is probably precisely that, there not being much call in AutoCAD, or a dingbat font, or whatever CorelDraw is these days, for the actual reticule from a gun sight.
Years ago, when I was coaching debaters, we always covered the temptation to argue the content of an example instead of addressing the point exemplified, as a trap not to fall into, and something to try to lure an opponent into.
polyorchnid octopunch
@KCinDC: I dunno, it looks more like the white power logo to me.
Mister Papercut
@KCinDC: No they’re completely right: it was never meant to be a graphic representation of targeti… whoops.
Elizabelle
Mr. Bai’s words:
Again: “It’s not that such leaders are necessarily trying to incite violence or hysteria; in fact, they’re not.”
I disagree. I think some “such leaders” know exactly what they are doing, and Sarah Palin is justly getting called out for it.
They’re dehumanizing their opponents, and making it futile to even attempt discussion with people who want to “destroy our American way of life.”
Mostly over the topic of extending universal healthcare coverage in a first world modern economy, one of the wealthiest in history.
How many articles in serious publications have we seen about Democrats promoting “The Big Lie”?
Commenter Rick Taylor at 14 called it re the false equivalency, but how many people even know the facts there?
Frank
“Once again, Harry, I must ask too much of you…” (Dumbledore — though I am probably misquoting slightly).
I suppose it would be too much to ask both sides to strive for more objectivity and honesty. IMO, the right is far more strident and nasty and churns out far more garbage than the left. I identify myself as progressive, but I also don’t think the discourse is helped much by photo-shopped pictures of George W. as head-stooge Moe. Referring to him as “Chimpy” makes those who already see him as a fool chortle in agreement, but won’t pull those in the center to “our side”.
Of course, one can point to a million points of blight as spewed forth by the right, including referring to BHO as “Worst-President-Ever” on his first day of office! (Anyone else recall seeing that posting by a troll on one of the forums?)
Many of us seem to have a scorched-earth policy of communication these days. We can’t simply disagree with someone — we must call them out, eviscerate them, obliterate them, and then do a rump-shaking victory jig on their remains. I suspect, however, that we’re afraid to lighten up a bit; after all, the other side won’t go easy on us! Some people see Beck/Coulter/Limbaugh, et al as their role models for political discourse.
I’m on a bit of a rambling rant, I know. In short — I wish we’d use honesty rather than hate-filled half/non-truths in our political discourse. I doubt one side will dare try to as a group do this for fear that the other side won’t join in. And demonizing other people pays good money! But what is the cost? A number of people have perished possibly in part because of over-heated rhetoric. (Yes, we could have a lone mentally-ill shooter here for whom the rhetoric I refer to was NOT a big factor… but what if that rhetoric WAS a factor? When is enough enough?)
Thanks for letting me vent!
Frank
Oh, man… Thought I’d take a walk on the wild side and drop in on Redstate, hoping (without hope) that I might encounter something like rational thought there… instead, the majority of postings and comments are about how the left is now picking on the right. Some of the comments promise more violence… So some of them are saying “our rhetoric had nothing to do with this and to say otherwise shows how horrible you lefties are” while the next comment says the violence was good and that more is on the way. (The Meerkin people having spoken and all…) I suppose that my above-posted wish is destined for the scrapheap. Anyway, thanks for the fish.
Liberty60
Speaking of false equivalencies and over-the-top rhetoric, lets not forget that strong language and sharp opinons ARE called for at times.
Calling the assassination of American citizens the tactic of a dictator is simply expressing the truth, even if it is painful and divisive to hear.
Advocating that uninsured people be allowed to die is hatefulness in its purest form, no matter how softly spoken or politely worded.
I left the Coffee Party for this reason; underneath the pleas for “civil” tone and language, is the false equivalency of suggesting that laws and policies that harm and even kill people is exactly the same as pointing out that very fact.
Truth is painful. Change is painful. Self-reflection and examination is painful.
There has never been an injustice that was defeated without howls of protest.
Yes, angry words can be found anywhere; but it isn’t the Left that is advocating policies that result in citizens being killed without charges or trial, it isn’t liberals who are willing to condemn millions of people to bankruptcy and death, simply to avoid paying a few extra dollars in taxes.
PeakVT
@PeakVT: Note to self: check post to see if you entered the correct link.
Frank
Good points, Liberty 60. In re-reading what I wrote, I did leave off the obvious point that sometimes strong language is called for. One of my quasi-related gripes is how NPR (in particular) will report a story, include a clip of a well-informed person and then book-end it with some genuinely ignorant comment from someone like Palin as though the two comments stand in reasonable contrast to one another. So many news agencies fail to examine the two claims and simply state that one side has more validity than the other! In other words: “30,000 planetary scientists say that global warming is real; however, Sarah Palin says, ‘What a bunch of wee-wee-ers!'” I wish the press and we the people could hold people more accountable for their claims.
And yet I also believe that something is lost when we substitute snark for content, insults for insight when we dialogue with each other.
WereBear
@Frank: The problem with your equivalency is that photoshopping George W Bush’s head onto a chimp body harms no one; and will not incite some deranged person to attempt it.
JR
It’s good to know that being a DailyKos diarist means that I’m inherently equal to the former governor of Alaska and Vice Presidential nominee for the Republican Party.
Frank
WereBear ~ No, it may not incite violence, but it does coarsen the dialogue. Mightn’t we strive for a higher level of discourse? Okay, maybe it doesn’t show from my postings today, but I DO value political humor, and such humor does sometimes bite its target in nasty fashion. But if we just keep amping up the rhetoric and accompanying visuals, are we truly going to reach a workable solution to the many vexing problems we all face?
I say this even as I read over Palin’s latest denial of inciting violence and can feel my blood boil, my desire to publicly chastize her, make her face her own miserable complicity in matters. There’s a part of me that wants to slap myself and say, “Oh, stop whining! The ‘right’ is far more hurtful in its rhetoric.” But if we never apply the brakes to our ever-accelerating rhetoric, will we safely reach any destination? Are we eating out our own souls if we just keep piling on the snark? I really want to know.
johnny walker
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/74882/511/541568
Kos himself said that Giffords had put a “bullseye” on the district and talked about adding her to a “target list.” What level of commentary on GOS can be considered noteworthy? I agree that a random diary is not on the same level as Palin, etc. but what about the guy who runs the site? He was one of the first to take a shit a shit on Palin for the target map, but he’s used some of that same language himself.
Look, this kind of violent rhetoric *does* happen on both sides. (If you don’t believe this, go look back over the thread titled “Oh no” and you’ll see people talking about how they were going to start carrying, how this was “civil war,” dozens of people saying, “It’s on” and etc.) Pretending that there isn’t *some level* of violent discourse on the left is just as bullshit as pretending that there are equal levels on both sides.
So was it wrong for Kos to use (some of) the same language as Palin? Or does it have to come down to some special parsing and moral slice-and-dicing where hey, he never used the “retreat and reload” terminology and he had no graphic so it’s totally different and has nothing to do with the overall issue of violent rhetoric becoming mainstream?
http://twitter.com/markos/status/23818108854607872
Right after the news of Giffords’ shooting broke, Kos tweeted “Fucking American Taliban.” Not only were there no details released — whatsoever — on the shooter’s identity at that point, but that phrase just happens to constitute a plug for his book. What a fucking coincidence!
(Ironically enough, he’s now pretending to be “flabbergasted” that this tragedy is being politicized. http://twitter.com/markos/status/24181865690701824 )
Bottom line, what I’m seeing here is a lot of people substituting “it isn’t as bad on our side” for “it doesn’t happen on our side.” Ok so yeah, someone on Kos used this rhetoric that we know is deplorable, but that person isn’t as prominent so no big! Well, a) like I said, what about when Markos himself does it, and b) why is it so hard to just say, “Yeah, that’s wrong too?” I mean, we can have the conversation about the size of bullhorns that Kos vs. Palin have available to them, but if it’s going to be done on a backdrop of “only rightwingers do this” then we’re bullshitting ourselves.
TL;DR: Matt Bai and Sarah Palin being assholes does not preclude Markos Moulitsas from being one as well.
debbie
It’s not just Palin who should be confronted on this incitement. I particularly remember reading about this quote from Jefferson being paraded around during the town halls: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” I think it’s time to confront all this incendiary language coming from the far right. Considering how subdued the Fox roundtable was this morning, they may be beginning to think the same thing.
Frank
We are the Montagues and Capulets now. “From ancient grudge break to new mutiny….”
My political analogy may be way off (I’m no middle-east studies scholar), but it seems a bit akin to the Israeli-Palestine conflict as well. “We want peace, but only if they stop taking our land.” “Well, WE want peace, if only you’d stop attacking us.” “Well, we’ll stop attacking you if you return our land.” “Well, we’ll return your land if you stop attacking us.” “Well, we’ll stop attacking you if you stop building new settlements.” “Well, we’ll stop building new settlements when….”
johnny walker
@debbie: But that’s just some random teabagger, so no big deal right? It’s not like he’s a former vice presidential candidate who regularly appears on TV.
I’m mostly being facetious, but why isn’t that as valid an argument for that person being no big deal as “well that’s just some random Kos comment” ??
Frank
Hi, Debbie #50 — I just saw that same quote this morning at Redstate (where I lurk three or so times a year to see what “the other side” is saying). It appeared in a column about how rightwing rhetoric was being unjustly tethered to yesterday’s events, and then one of their own posters goes and illustrates the point that violence-inciting rhetoric IS part of their game.
MTiffany
Since it won’t be easy, I’m sure Fox ‘News’ will be eager to lend a hand.
Jay in Oregon
I just want to ask Sarah Palin if disappearing that gunsights graphic in the wee hours after the shooting was an example of “retreating” or “reloading”?
A real profile in courage, that one is.
debbie
@ johnny walker:
Actually, I think the real culprits are the Republican establishment politicians. They kept silent the past two years because they figured that kind of talk worked for their political benefit. They are the ones who really need to be called to account.
Palin’s too stupid to have any integrity, but most of these Congresspeople know better. And I hope they’re beginning to realize that we know that they should, too.
A Humble Lurker
@Liberty60:
No. It’s not, not if it’s a legal right granted by Congress.