Once Again, She Bears No Responsibility

Sarah Palin, in a desperate attempt to 'refudiate' what everyone with a sane mind knows to be true, tries to distance herself from the violent rhetoric of her 'campaign'. Of course, she does so by not talking to any media or taking any questions, just saying what she's been told to say and treating it like the gospel.

Out of the mouth of a fucktard: 

"Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not by law abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their rights at campaign rallies...Journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence that 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?"

Let's dissect, shall we?

She says these monstrous acts stand on their own, not with those who listen to talk radio.
But, when talk radio and Fox News report of taking up arms, or taking back the country by bullet, they bear some responsibility.

She says these monstrous acts stand on their own  not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, although for the life of me, I can't think of any other candidate, much less one of the liberal side of the aisle, using crosshairs to designate their 'enemies' No, Palin, YOU did that.

She says these monstrous acts stand on their own, not by law abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their rights at campaign rallies.But why is there a need to bring a gun to a rally? If the intent of a rally is to garner support for a cause, why bring a gun? If you attend a rally hoping to speak out against what's being said, why do you need a gun? and, again, I am not seeing stories of liberal;s being armed in public.

She says the media is stirring this up, talking about how the debate has gotten more heated, and she asks when the debate was less heated. Well, I agree with her, the debate over political issues and policy, has always been heated, but it's rarely been armed--even back in the days of duels, both sides were armed--but it's rarely been violent. It's rarely been about reloading, and crosshairs, and taking the country by bullet. And, Palin, when someone shouts out in a crowd about killing Obama when he was running for president, and you say nothing, then you are, by your silence, agreeing with the shouters.

And the shooters.

Face it, Palin, your political career is the nosedive of its life, and I for one, cannot wait for the end of it. We'll be much better off without your violent rhetoric, your use of guns as metaphors, and your lack of utter responsibility in anything you do.