Palin and Obama respond to Arizona shootings

Cate P says:

01:28pm | 13/01/11

He has a very good speechwriter.

RobJ says:

01:49pm | 13/01/11

Of course he does Cate, he’s the president he dosne’t have the time to write speeches (ior sound bites) Still, he’s an excellent writer and orator in his own right, Only an ignorant fool would dispute this.

PaulB says:

02:22pm | 13/01/11

Creating an impression of substance has always been Obama’s handlers’ first priority.  You’d almost think he actually made the decisions himself sometimes.

Greg says:

05:55pm | 13/01/11

RobJ is the ignorant fool if he thinks Obama writes his own speeches.

He can’t even remember what he allegedly wrote, and is utterly dependant upon teleprompters.

Everytime he reads a speech, he looks from the left to right teleprompter and back again in a continuous loop. He looks like he is watching a tennis match.

Tom says:

08:37pm | 13/01/11

@RobJ, NAUGHTY!
Remember “As per usual folks - if you want to comment keep it civil.”

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

08:40pm | 13/01/11

The man is a dilettante & as useless as tits on a bull

RobJ says:

09:34am | 14/01/11

“RobJ is the ignorant fool if he thinks Obama writes his own speeches.”

I think you need to learn to read, I wrote:

“he’s the president he dosne’t have the time to write speeches”

If you had the wherewithal to do some research you’d find he’s an author and he did write his own speeches before he became president.

Your comprehension = FAIL!

RobJ says:

09:37am | 14/01/11

I’m sorry Tom but one would be an ignorant fool to claim that he’s no good as an orator or speech writer after all a simple google search would show the facts to be very different. So to make a false assumption without thinking to check facts does make one an ignorant fool.

Cate P says:

04:20pm | 14/01/11

He has a very good speechwriter.

Albert Grippenrip says:

07:39pm | 14/01/11

Cate, he has a very good speech writer because he has very good ideas.

hot tub political machine says:

01:26pm | 13/01/11

She was never going to get elected regardless. Palin is a succesful political celebrity - but even in the U.S. you need to be a centrist (by U.S. standards) to have a realistic chance of getting Jonny Middle and his 2.5 kids to vote for you.

Macca says:

02:10pm | 13/01/11

@HTPM, “but even in the U.S. you need to be a centrist (by U.S. standards) to have a realistic chance of getting Jonny Middle and his 2.5 kids to vote for you”

I disagree with this (not the US standards part) but the rest. I actually think, with the US non-complusary voting system, if you run with an idea that will impact on enough people in a positive way (i.e. health care for Obama), you can get people who ordinarily do not vote to do so. That was one of the Tea Party’s great successes in the mid-term elections, generating motivation amongst people who ordinarily were not going to vote. That could be classed as celebrity politics, but I’d be suprised if this was the end of Palin.

MarK says:

02:43pm | 13/01/11

Why?

The people that are libelling her were never going to write a good thing about her or endorse her anyway.

All it has done is make her supporters more supportive and her detractors more feral.

Swinging people will look at the two extremes and make up their own minds.

All this has done is just entrench the usual crap that is tossed her way. Calls for her kids to be rapoed, her to be raped blah balh balh.

Nothing special here. Business as usual.

You have read this incredibly wrong because of your bias and lack of critical thought process.

Reg says:

02:50pm | 13/01/11

I may be wrong but I think the mid-term election would not attract the voter turnout of the Presidential election and most of the non-voters would be Democrats or casual voters attracted to Obama’s health platform. 

Poor Sarah, she couldn’t help trying to project a personality at inopportune moments as she read someone’s defective script off an idiot board. Pathetic and pure HAM! I just hope she dodges at the right moment, it would never do to make her a symbol of Republican sacrifice. Aren’t you happy now that you bought into that US Security firm?

The Badger says:

02:59pm | 13/01/11

mark agreed,
Her supporters will be more avid
Her detractors will be more detracting

The middle ground will be appalled at her bad judgment. She is now truly toxic to the republican faceless men.

Perhaps you will understand it better if it put into pictures for you

http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/f1dbc4d0-6dd5-4b18-9c3e-dbfdc989cb86.html

I suspect you have read it wrong and your thought process is flawed. How on earth can being associated with this and her inappropriate comments and backpedaling make her stronger?
That’s like saying having only a policy of NO makes Abbott stronger. It doesn’t, it just makes him look like the obstructionist wrecker that he is.

MarK says:

03:07pm | 13/01/11

Nah you hate her so you see all she said as bad..

Others will think differently.

James1 says:

05:24pm | 13/01/11

MarK and Badger,

You are both being influenced by your own political preferences.  No go and sit in the corner and think about your bias until you can behave yourselves.

The Badger says:

05:53pm | 13/01/11

@james1
No I’m not.
I’m Apolitical
I

Hamish says:

01:06pm | 13/01/11

WTGO, did you ever think Palin and Obama’s speeches were different because no one was suggesting Obama was to blame? You don’t have to defend yourself if no one is accusing you of anything.

I think both speeches made very pertinent points. Although, Palin should have known better than to talk about blood libels in the context of most Jews in America traditionally being Democrat supporters.

CaptainCrunch says:

01:12pm | 13/01/11

You didn’t watch her video did you?

Why can’t Palin defend herself from these shrill attacks made by people like you?

They both said the same thing, showed compassion etc. But keep hating no matter what aye?

Graham says:

06:08pm | 13/01/11

You lefties hatefully blame her for a murder you know she didn’t commit or contribute to, then you hatefully critcise her for defending herself against your hatefull acusations. If you lefties had total control there would be no individual accountability, others other than the perpetrators would always be to blame, and so the whole country would be punished for the crimes of individuals. Leftism = Hate = Blame society rather than the criminal = Punish everybody = Take away freedoms = Stalinism.

paul says:

08:21am | 14/01/11

It is simple, really. Obama spoke for a better society and asked us to learn from the tradegy and make the world better.

Palin said it wasn’t me and it was someone elses fault so leave me alone.

Obama was presidential. Palin was Bart Simpson.

It is at moments like these who you see who the real leaders of people are. Palin certainly failed the test.

Greg says:

12:59am | 15/01/11

Why should everybody be so hyper sensitive to Jewish feelings, when they go un-criticised in our Big Media for saying things like Gentile sperm leads to barbaric offspring?

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4006385,00.html

Which comment is really offensive, as opposed to just an alleged copyright infringement on an exclusive victimhood statement?

Balderdash says:

11:02pm | 15/01/11

Greg
Troll jewish extremist websites much?

dtcMCMLXXII says:

01:19pm | 13/01/11

Brian the problem with your argument Brian is that Palin’s rhetoric hasn’t actually caused the loss of any lives, and that whilst you think that “anyone” would be proud to have Obama as their leader, a huge chunk of Americans don’t want him as their leader.

Brian says:

01:35pm | 13/01/11

@dtcMCMLXXII

When a political leader in a country where the right to have and use a gun is the in the constitution tells her supporters to “lock and load” and then puts out political propoganda with crosshairs on her political enemies, what exactly do you expect these people to do? Especially those with mental and psychotic issues who can walk down the road and buy a gun and ammo from their local shop.

No Palin is not directly responsible for the murders in Arizona, but you cannot honestly sit there and say that violent rhetoric by political leaders,  in which they are telling their supporters to lock and load and aim at their political enemies is not inciting violence and hatred. And considering, accordinging to America’s own statistics, there have been nearly 20 domestic terrorist acts committed by people with guns in the last years,  all of whom have been identified as people with anti-government right wing views (anti-abortion, anti-gay etc), tell me, what exactly do you think Palin means when she says the people of America should “lock and load”?

Carlos says:

01:59pm | 13/01/11

@dtcMCMLXXII

Obama aside, we will never know for sure whether Palin actually had anything to do with the shooting or not, but why even provide the opportunity? Her message was pretty clear, regardless of the fact that she probably didn’t mean it literally. Guns, triiggers, targets- shoot em down!
Was it her fault someone may (or may not) have actually listened? No, it was the guy who shot her’s fault. But should she take some responsibility for making sure politicians speak civilly in the future? Yes! If you want the responsibility of making a country a better place then you damn well take responsibility for your own actions.

Macca says:

02:24pm | 13/01/11

@Brian, there is so much in your comment which is just bullshit and lies.

1. I’m not sure how you can distinguish between “lock and load” and “if they bring a knife, we’ll bring a gun”.
2. The Democrats have also used similar maps to that of Palin’s, including Crosshairs.
3. “all of whom have been identified as people with anti-government right wing views”. Actually, Loughner has shown absolutely no political aliances whatsoever. He was a man with a known mental illness.

Quite simply, your last statement is a vicious lie and attack on those with a political viewpoint different to your own.

Anthony says:

02:40pm | 13/01/11

@Carlos. What about all the democratic slogans, posters, etc that have featured bringing a gun to a knife fight, (a speech by Obama) or targets over republican areas. I’m guessing that you feel that they too should take responsibility for their actions? Do they rate a mention or just Sara Palin?

David C says:

03:38pm | 13/01/11

This is the problem with this whole debate, both sides made what could be described as stupid comments , yet it seems the rants are coming from only one side?
Brian I am sorry but your cliam that Palin has used rhetoric has cost lives just is not backed up by any facts whatsoever… the guy was a nutjob fullstop

Tom says:

08:47pm | 13/01/11

@Carlos, your comment was in extremely poor taste even for an extreme whacko like yourself. “We’ll never know ...” Speak for yourself and those little green men in the UFOs. The rest of us do know Carlos.

Scarneck says:

01:23pm | 13/01/11

Hear hear Rufus @ 01:07pm…as Badger said earlier, she’s finished.

Hamish says:

01:24pm | 13/01/11

Rufus, I think you misunderstand the US polity. The disgraceful attempts by the left to link Palin to the actions of a madman will probably have the opposite effect.

Luce says:

02:10pm | 13/01/11

rufus, Giffords was definitely right to condemn Palin as they were provocative and unnecessary actions, however saying she’s responsible for the shooting is a bit of a stretch. Don’t get me wrong, I think Palin is a complete twat, but the gunman was mentally unstable and was already immersing himself in dangerous ideology, and there’s no clear evidence he was even a Palin supporter. Would her actions really have been the thing that pushed him over the line?

Ryan says:

02:15pm | 13/01/11

@rufus: produce your PROOF that the shooter was influenced in any way by Palin, otherwise you are stooping yourself to lower than excrement by attempting to gain political mileage from this.

PaulB says:

02:28pm | 13/01/11

Hamish it will harden the existing views of those who already hold them.  Palin won’t gain anything from this as her choir already have their hymn book and there’s nothing new in it.  The FOX crowd are not known for their skills at thinking.

Macca says:

02:30pm | 13/01/11

@Rufus,

Was Giffords wrong to condemn Palin then?
Maybe not, but did she condemn her own party for similar maps?

Why did she take it down?
Because a person has died and any political attacks on a person’s ideas or opinions should not be up for public discussion during this time. That’s basic respect.

“She’s as good as washed up”. I don’t like Sarah Palin as a politician, and I wouldn’t vote conservative if she was the leader of the republicans. But Australians are more moderate than the US and your statement shows an increadible ignorance for the US and conservative politics in general

Hamish says:

02:56pm | 13/01/11

You may be right PaulB, but I think a lot of moderates in the US will be sick to their stomachs over the leftist media’s blatant schadenfreude.

rufus says:

03:40pm | 13/01/11

Ryan and other critics - I haven’t said Palin is responsible, I’ve merely posed some questions. What are the answers?

Macca - so, after a respectful interval, the ‘gunsight’ graphic will be OK to go back up? After all, it didn’t incite an assassin, did it?

Ryan says:

09:19am | 14/01/11

@rufus: no Rufus, you were implying responsibility by linking the images on her website to the shooting thereby drawing a long bow on implying that the shooter was influenced by her tactics. So now PROVE the mud you are slinging.

rufus says:

11:27am | 14/01/11

Ryan - you don’t want to answer the questions, do you?  Apparently Palin wants to avoid them, too. An eloquent silence, I think.

Gay Chevara says:

01:26pm | 13/01/11

Actually, Dodge, you couldn’t be further from the truth. Violence is almost always a product of the left, hence their love of psychopathic mass murderer Che Guevara (and the fact that almost all political violence has been in the name of left-wing idealogies). The Democrats used almost exactly the same graphic as Palin at the 2004 Presidential election and in several elections since, but have never been criticised for it. Just look at the left’s insane and violent ramblings on twitter for further proof of their hypocrisy and violent tendencies. Almost every comment for the past two years has been advocating the shootings of Liberman and Palin, with little or no remorse. These aren’t just long bows like the one being drawn here, they are word for word comments.

Hamish says:

01:31pm | 13/01/11

Seriously Dodge, what is it with you lefties and your macabre attempts to gain political mileage out of tragedies? Can’t you just accept no one really knows this guy’s motivations and all evidence points to the fact he is a lunatic.

Also, just a tip - if you want to denigrate right-wingers for preaching hate and using language which may incite violence, it’s best not to start your post by saying things like ‘right wing commentators have blood on their hands’

hot tub political machine says:

01:34pm | 13/01/11

I don’t think its as simple as calling the nut job commentators “right wing” - they are kind of a paranoid/xenophobe group more than they are right wing. Check out this story for a good discussion of how it is a stange mix of the selfish, the community mindedness and fringe religion that drives these movements:

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2011/01/12/3111126.htm?topic1=home&topic2;
To my mind its not left/right that best explains the Tead Party - rather a combo of money, paranoia and belief in manifest destiny

Richard says:

03:41pm | 13/01/11

Good link Hot Tub, but your conclusions from it are wrong. The Tea Party is not xenophobic or paranoid, and not supportive of big money. It is a libertarian party to my knowledge, and not right-wing at all, except in those areas in which libertarianism and conservatism overlap.

They are not a combo of money, paranoia and belief in manifest destiny; in fact they arose (and every one was really quite shocked when they appeared initially remember) in opposition to big money, banksters, the fed etc.

And I don’t think a healthy distrust of big government is paranoia, although I will out myself as a Julian Assange supporter at this point so maybe I’m blinded to that.

But the Tea Party has been vilified and mischaracterised so much that I really struggle to understand why. In the end, I just feel saddened and disillusioned I guess that such a spontaneous grass-roots movement comprised of millions of good hearted people campaigning against simply the worst blatant practices of kleptocracy, plutarchy and corruption can become so hated in such a short time for no good apparent reason.

James1 says:

05:30pm | 13/01/11

“Violence is almost always a product of the left.”

Well done Gay.  You have just descended to the level of those getting into Sarah Palin.  Way to discredit the point Bolt was making.

You also ignore the evils done by the far right - which are identical to those done by the far left.  Its people like you who make conservatism look bad, and ruin things for the rest of us.

hot tub political machine says:

12:50pm | 14/01/11

I agree Richard that there is a strong Libertarian streak in the Tea party - I was really interested though to read a report journalist who was a genuine member of the tea party rather than going undercover.(Sorry can’t find the link - i found it via the Punch sidebar a while back)

It shows how there are both the libertarians and those who want more conservative social control in the movement. The journo - a libertarian - found himself siding with other libertarians whilst being made uncomfortable by others in the movement. I feel its an interesting juggling act for the leaders of the movement - because there are really distinct groups within the movement.

Robbo says:

05:57pm | 14/01/11

“right-wingers attempt to assert the shooter in fact had left wing leanings and sympathies.”

They are not “attempting to assert” anything.  The people who knew Loughner said he was “very liberal, very left-wing”. 

If you have evidence to the contrary, I would you love it if you share it with us.

RobJ says:

01:57pm | 13/01/11

“He also said, “If they bring a gun, we bring a knife.
“

LOL ! I think you’re a little confused.

dodge says:

02:09pm | 13/01/11

LOL@They bring a gun so bring a knife? Your saying a leader telling you to ‘bring a knife to a gunfight’ is incitement? Incitement for suicide I guess you could have a point.

And it doesn’t stop there. the poster above wants to compare left comments on twitter to a network tv channel that goes to more than 80 countries? What? Comments from internet nobodies over political leaders is substantially different, wouldn’t you say?

And you’re referencing Che? And he was a ‘pyshcopathic mass murderer’? I don’t even care about Cuba’s liberation, it was a number of years ago friend, and that’s putting it lightly.

I don’t even have to partake in US forums for that level of propoganda and denial… Impressive, look forward to more material.

someguy says:

02:22pm | 13/01/11

wait eric
either the right and the left can incite each other to violence using there first amendment rights or they cant, you decide however trying to claim the left cant use its Constitutional rites when the right has clearly been using there’s breaks your whole argument

James1 says:

05:22pm | 13/01/11

I condemn both Eric.  US politics has been sick for a long time, since before Obama.  If these events inject a little moderation into their political rhetoric, and stop the calls (implied or otherwise) for political violence, then at least something good has come from this tragedy.  Sadly, from the reaction of commentators on both sides, it seems unlikely.

Like my coffee cup says, “I disagree with you, but I’m pretty sure you’re not Hitler.”

P says:

05:26pm | 13/01/11

The cherry picked examples of things Obama has said in the past are very very weak ones, surely you can do better. There is absolutely nothing inciteful about saying ‘get in their faces’, and ‘brininging a gun to a knife fight’ is more a turn of phrase. I doubt Obama was talking about participating in actual knife fights with guns.

A bit different to advocating ‘second ammendment remedies’

For two years the right has openly preached an overthrow of the government, they have preached hate, and when hate occurs, they are suddenly shocked and horrified that somebody has done exactly what they have been calling for.

Tom says:

08:54pm | 13/01/11

Speeches are just words Lucius. Empty words by empty people for empty people.
Too bad most Yanks are suffering while he does his empathy Hollywood thing for you mindless morons.

Lucius says:

01:50pm | 13/01/11

No,

Ive seen conservatives walk into churches, hospitals and health clinics and blow themselves up along with many innocent people just because their views differ.

Ive seen conservatives invade foreign countries and kill innocent families and children just for resources.

Ive seen conservatives continually discriminate against women, gays and anyone who doesn’t fit what they call a “good Christian” lifestyle.

Just today, I saw a conservative public school in New York City decide to ban diversity from it’s school, which enables them ban races that aren’t “white” or expel homosexual students from their school simply because they are born the way they are.

How is being a racist, bigoted, hateful conservative who discriminates against others going to build a “better, safe community”?

Luce says:

02:02pm | 13/01/11

Lucius, it’s not, but self deception has rarely been absent from the right.

Carlos says:

02:06pm | 13/01/11

@ The Right Way

First of all, no one is right all of the time, which you seem to imply you are.

And I beg to differ with your arguement- I think the problem is not right or left or liberals or conservatives. The problem is extremists. Left and right don’t always protest in the same way, but that doesn’t mean both can’t do horrific damage. When you try to make decisions for other people just because you think you’re right… that there is dangerous.

Ryan says:

02:12pm | 13/01/11

@Lucius: where have you seen conservatives walk into churches, hospitals and health clinics and blow themselves up.. Examples please with PROOF that they are right wing conservatives.

Syl says:

03:03pm | 13/01/11

How about we stop making gross generalisations about the people who support either side.  There are extremists (violent wankers) on both sides of the coin, anyone who cannot see this is as deluded as one can be.

James1 says:

05:28pm | 13/01/11

Interesting, if silly, comment The Right Way.

Last time I checked, Al Qaeda were not a very progressive organisation.  Their interpretation of Islam is perhaps one of the most backward-looking and conservative versions there is.

Also, the English Defence League do all the things you apportion to the left.  Try taking a few facts with your opinions.

Servaas Hofmeyr says:

05:44pm | 13/01/11

Lucius, are you under the honestly convinced that sexuality and how one desires to live out your own sexuality, whatever that may entail, is necessarily in us at birth already?

Coldsnacks says:

07:50pm | 13/01/11

“where have you seen conservatives walk into churches, hospitals and health clinics and blow themselves up.”

Not quite blowing themselves up but:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_George_Tiller

Sure, the murderer was a diagnosed schizophrenic, but it’s surely no coincidence that he considered himself a member of the “Army of God”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_of_God_(USA)

petery says:

05:57pm | 14/01/11

Some people have short memories and know very little history. In 1939-45 before i was born there was apparently a war against a right wing German government , that invaded Euope and Russia.mass murdering many leftists   and jews. oh yes, they were called Nazis, (you have heard of them then !) and very anti leftist they were. Some people considered their invasion of Russia, a good deed ,cleansing the world of all those evil,left wing Russians. Too bad that bastard Stalin beat them/

Now unless this was all a complete fantasy,because it happened before I was born, this is an example of right wing elements being capable of mass murder. Perhaps it is just left wing conspiracy theory   and world war 2 never happened. Being proudly right wing,does not make you always right. If we had let Hitler have his way then the right wing would have been the only ones left.

Sorry,if i appear to be making lousy jokes, but the only one to treat some of the confused rants on this topic is to laugh at them.Hopefully the writers might be encouraged to think and research a bit more,before inflicting their opinions on us.

P.S   bit difficult to use the simple minded terms left and right when you talk about the Middle Ages, but during the Spanish inquisition.conservative elements in catholic church executed people who had unorthodox views. Could be another example of murderous right wingers who thought they were always right.

petery says:

06:54pm | 14/01/11

sorry, but you must be joking. American constitution is a couple of hundred years old and hardly ancient. When you talk about Palin suing the pants off people, you seem to talking about the right to bare bottoms and not bare arms. The amendment talks about the right to bear arms. Dum dum dum dum diddle dee. hehe.

petery says:

09:00pm | 14/01/11

I think you mean the right to bear arms not bare arms, Suing the pants off reporters might give them bare bottons though. Dum di dim dedah!

Ryan says:

02:19pm | 13/01/11

Oh my, the left stooping even lower by attempting to cash in on this horrible atrocity. Have you no shame? Actually I think I answered that for myself when I showed in the previous thread just how low the left will go.

MarK says:

02:35pm | 13/01/11

http://www.investors.com/EditorialCartoons/Cartoon.aspx?id=559549

The real villian.

Luce says:

03:02pm | 13/01/11

MarK, thank you!

Nil says:

03:07pm | 13/01/11

Wow… these really are tasteless. I personally don’t like Palin, but all this opportunistic attacking from the left makes me think maybe she is the lesser of two evils( I do concede that this is unlikely but it does make you think). By blatantly lying and drawing stupid conclusions from this incident it makes the usually moderate democratic party look bad and extreme. I think everyone really needs to step back and remember people have been murdered!

n_dude says:

12:56pm | 14/01/11

I preferred Badger’s cartoons.

Richard says:

09:53pm | 13/01/11

Nope, I totally disagree. I think the ABC’s moderation style on The Drum is far more ridiculous than The Punch’s. The very worst though are that mob that have been preaching about big ideas over the last couple of days. I left a very reasonable, appropriate and relevant comment on their health blog, in which I addressed the very same issues they did, just re-imagineered from a different perspective, and they totally refused to publish it! It didn’t get through their moderation at all.

Oh well, I guess rational thought and reasonable debate does present a real threat to the public’s acceptance of their left-wing agenda, so they did what they had to do I suppose: I can’t blame them for trying to protect their position from an unassailable attack of clear logic, even if their platform when stripped of empty rhetoric and sloganeering is as stable as an ice-skating elephant.

Oneliner says:

05:11am | 14/01/11

Don’t read The Punch much, then?

PaulB says:

02:31pm | 13/01/11

Crazy stuff Zeta, but the bit about George Soros could have some substance…..

Zeta says:

02:36pm | 13/01/11

@ PaulB - Sounds like you and I have been reading the same AboveTopSecret.com threads!

But no. The George Soros thing has no substance.

Justin says:

02:59pm | 13/01/11

A modernized version of the Bill Classic. You Zeta, are fast becoming my favorite punch contributer.

James1 says:

05:33pm | 13/01/11

As always, Zeta cuts to the heart of the issue.

Brian says:

03:18pm | 13/01/11

The mind of a right-winger:

A crazed lunatic with mental issues and a criminal history who went into a store bought ammo and a gun and killed several people, was able to do so because of the right-wing’s assertion that guns should be available to all, and right-wing laws that allow guns to be brought by anybody, with no checks and no licence.

The right wing response: He was a leftie crazy and it has nothing to do with gun laws and the availability of guns and no politicians who spread hate rhetoric or support the availability of guns to anyone is to blame.

Several asylum seekers die on Christmas Island in a tragic accident due to a greedy, illegal boat captain’s recklessness.

The right wing response: Blame Labor.

I wish I could suspend logical thought like that. My life would so much easier…

Hamish says:

03:42pm | 13/01/11

Nice try Brian. When did I say he was a leftie? When did I say guns should be available to all? Also, most American politicians both Republican and Democrat support quite open gun laws. America has a strong history of support for liberal gun laws on both sides. Palin, having never been in a position to legislate, has had no effect on gun laws at all. Maybe you weren’t aware of that. So, yeah, points for effort.

If the ALP didn’t slacken the asylum seeker laws, the boat wouldn’t have been there. It’s called direct cause and effect.

Chris L says:

07:00pm | 13/01/11

Um, Hamish, I think Brian was simply mentioning that your hypocrisy is showing.

“50 odd asylum seekers die on Christmas Island as a direct result of the ALP’s soft border policies.” - Isn’t this the kind of ghoulish, oportunistic blaming that you decry in the same post?

Hamish says:

07:49pm | 13/01/11

What hypocrisy Chris? Direct relationship versus macabre attempt at political points scoring. Debate the facts. If you don’t believe there’s a difference, argue it. Otherwise you’re just white noise in this debate.

Chris L says:

12:18pm | 14/01/11

OK Hamish. What direct facts show that the tragedy at Christmas Island was Gillard’s fault?

If all you have is “She changed the policy, then they died” that’s about as good as saying “Palin showed cross-hairs on Giffords, said Lock and Load, then Giffords got shot”.

You say it’s wrong when blame is apportioned to the right but you seem comfy drawing the long bow at the left.

AdamC says:

02:35pm | 13/01/11

Dodge, at the moment, you can only engage in root cause speculation, not analysis. This is because, as yet, we are not aware of this killer’s motives or influences.

“Don’t people get tired of Americans wilful belief they can just legislate against these kinds of things.”

How are Americans legislating against “these kinds of things”? By criminalising murder? To my knowledge, ever country does that. Through gun control? AZ actually has particularly permissive firearms laws.

I think you are a little confused, Dodge.

Hamish says:

02:38pm | 13/01/11

Dodge, I think you’ll find Americans are taking the opportunity for self-assessment, unlike you who are taking an opportunity to politically grandstand.

Economist says:

03:12pm | 13/01/11

Hamish clearly you never politically grandstand.

“50 odd asylum seekers die on Christmas Island as a direct result of the ALP’s soft border policies. The left wing media response: it’s too early to talk about blame.” Hamish 2:09.

Hypocrite.

I put it to you how is the left (not all) attributing the atrocity to Palin any different to the right blaming the greens for natural disasters?

Hamish says:

03:27pm | 13/01/11

Economist, how is pointing out the hypocrisy of others hypocritical? Do you actually have anything constructive to add or are you just sloganeering? I mean, I’m happy to debate the issues with you if you’d like. Do you believe Gillard’s policies weren’t responsible? If so, make an argument, don’t just call me a hypocrite. It’s not Q & A or a primary school classroom.

I’m not aware I’ve said anything about the Greens and natural disasters. Unless of course you have evidence that I have?

Economist says:

04:03pm | 13/01/11

Hamish you stated “50 odd asylum seekers die on Christmas Island as a direct result of the ALP’s soft border policies” as though it was fact. Where’s your evidence? You didn’t state something like “it’s no different to the right accusing the ALP of the deaths on Xmas Is with no evidence” Did you? that would be considered an assessment of left hypocricy. It’s like a lefty saying Siev X was all Howard’s fault.

Did I say “you” blame Greenies for natural disasters such as Fire and floods. No I said righties. I should have said some righties. Apologies to fair minded righties, but look at Bolter’s blogs!

That’s why you and Bolters, Eric, notshow and 50% of contributors to the Punch are barely worth reading because the reader knows what they’re going to say. Really I think a lot of regulars are quite conceited. You all constantly backslap one another where someone agrees with your opinion. But I do enjoy Adam C, hot tub, fairsfair, Zeta and many others even when I disagree with some of their points and ideas. The difference between these indviduals and yourself is their willingness to self reflect on their opinion and reassess their position. This is a skill very few people seem to have, including Palin for that matter.

PS Like you I believe you can’t blame Palin, but you can blame US politcal rhetoric generally.

papachango says:

04:20pm | 13/01/11

‘The mileage the left gains is HANDED to them by the right via outlets like Fox and Palin.’

I’m not a particular supporter of Palin, but I’m not convinced by this. She has an uncanny knack of getting the left so worked up and frothing at the mouth, that they simply beclown themselves trying to attack, smear and discredit her. She comes across as an airhead, but I wonder if this isn’t a shrewd strategy to make the left overreach - if so it works brilliantly.

All that stuff about wanting her 14yo daughter to be knocked up, speculation about whether she’s the true mother of her youngest child, calling her the ‘mother of a retard’, threatening Palin to be gang raped by ‘black brothers’, effigies of her with a noose or a shoot Palin in the head game - just HANDS mileage to Palin and the Tea Party.

It certainly outdoes any of the dumb things she’s said, which tend to get exaggerated by the media who ingore Obama taking about 57 states or his Muslim faith

Hamish says:

08:00pm | 13/01/11

Economist, I’m happy to stand by the fact we had a handful of boats each year (I think as low as two or three) before the ALP changed the laws and after that we’ve had 100 odd each year. The removal of temporary protection visas combined with the removal of offshore processing has resulted in an absolute bonanza for unscrupulous people smugglers trading in human misery. Create the the market and you create the tragedy. Direct cause and effect. Surely as an economist you would understand those relationships?

Perhaps you could explain the similarity re Palin? I look forward to the attempt.

Also if you’re going to call ‘me’ a hypocrite I expect it to be related to what I’ve actually said, not just some commentator who happens to be right wing.

Economist says:

09:52pm | 13/01/11

I’m calling you a hypocrite because your drawn a long bow regarding the death of the immigrants with Labor policy. Siev X in 2001, where 353 immigrants died, can then be blamed on Liberal policy?

It’s the same long bow that the left is drawing with Palin.

Richard says:

01:10am | 14/01/11

Ever heard on chronology economist? A sequence of events through time? Its quite simple: before Siev X there wasn’t a problem, then Siev X came along and there was now a problem, then the Liberal government solved the problem (Pacific Solution), then the Labor government unwound the solution, then the problem came back again, then the Christmas Island tragedy occurred. Surely you can follow such a clear and logical process as this?

And in following this process, surely you can now see why Labor was responsible for the Christmas Island tragedy (because they unwound the policy solution that had been put in place to prevent that very occurrence), while the Liberal government was not responsible for the Siev X disaster (because up until that time no one had previously set up a policy framework to prevent it from happening) do you follow me?

Economist says:

07:12am | 14/01/11

Well as I say I’m more than happy to change my mind. Having stewed on this last night, Hamish and now Richard has added himself to the mix,  I can see causality.

However I also put it to you that although the Pacific solution may have had a direct affect, I would also argue that the Siev X sinking itself was a deterrent and that the more surreptitious (the ones night enshrined in legislation)  Liberal policies with Indonesian authorities and federal police may have been wound back.

As a result, apologies Hamish for calling to a hypocrite, but don’t try and tell me the “left” are the only hypocrites and haters,.

James1 says:

08:35am | 14/01/11

That logic doesn’t really work Hamish.  In any case, lets turn it to another matter.

For years, no Democratic congresswomen were shot in the head.  There were no calls for conservatives to take up arms, reload, or target the government during that time.

Calls are made to reload, or pursue second amendment remedies, or bullets rather than ballots, and shortly afterwards a Democratic congresswomen plus a dozen others are shot.

Such things are known by the educated among us as correlations.  There is no causation established with any certainty in either the case of the wrecked Christmas Island boat (especially if you only have numbers to prove your point), or the violent political rhetoric.  That is why you are blinding by your own political outlook here.

Hamish says:

09:51am | 14/01/11

Economist, I must admit, it’s not often someone on sites like this considers the facts and alters their position to any extent at all. So, for that I must commend you.

I must also agree that there are plenty of hypocrites and haters on both sides of politics. I did not necessarily mean to suggest that right-wingers are always in the ‘right’, just that in this case I feel there has been a rather macabre attempt to unfairly gain political mileage out of a tragedy.

On a side note, I also agree that the tone of American political discourse is far from ideal, although again I feel that both sides of politics needs to take responsibility for this. The hysterical rants coming from the right side of politics under Obama mirror similarly shrill hyperbole from the left when Bush was in power.

Hamish says:

10:01am | 14/01/11

James1, political assassinations in America are nothing new. They have happened for centuries. Admittedly most recent examples of assassinations have been nutter lefties trying to kill generally Democrat politicians, but suggesting political violence in America is a new thing just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Also, why are you desperate to find correlation in this case? What was the ‘correlation’ with Reagan and the Kennedys? Can’t you just accept that nutters occasionally shoot people and their motivations are very hard to determine. As I say, there seems to be a very distasteful attempt going on to blame someone for the actions of a lunatic. You must keep in mind this guy killed multiple people. This wasn’t a cold political assassination. This guy is a mass murderer.

Hamish says:

10:13am | 14/01/11

Also, James1, you might argue there were other factors that contributed to the Christmas Island tragedy, but the ALP changed a policy which had almost immediate results. By removing TPVs, they created a pathway towards, and a market for, permanent residency. Undoubtedly there were some ‘push’ factors at work, but the ALP changed a policy. This policy change ‘caused’ people to start making dangerous boat journeys again. A tragedy like this was inevitable. Indeed many other boat people had already died trying to make the journey. The only difference in this case is there was TV footage.

Palin is not in a position to change policy.

James1 says:

10:21am | 14/01/11

Don’t take me wrong, Hamish.  I don’t think there is any causation here at all.  As you perhaps know, correlation does not equal causation.  Of course, there are always enough stupid people to say that it does, as we are seeing.

My point is that, on the basis of a similar lack of actual evidence and a similar correlation, people are drawing conclusions about certain events off Christmas Island, yet fail to see the equivalence with what is happening to Palin at the moment because of their political views.  With events such as this, let us wait until we find out what happened, and make judgements based on evidence, rather than exploiting the deaths of innocent people for electoral gain.

Economist says:

10:23am | 14/01/11

Hamish, I agree both sides are to blame, but I don;t liekt the excuse because the others do we should be allowed to do it too. If your interested, or haven’t already seen it, you might like to look at Jon Stewarts take on this in a recent interview with a Republican senator http://www.startribune.com/politics/113428164.html?elr=KArks:DCiUec7PaP3E77K_0c::D3aDhUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUvca_bPiL_ec7PaP3iU This article sums it up, but you can hit the daily show website for the extended interview (http://www.thedailyshow.com).

I’ve got to say I agree with Stewart, that there does seem to be a difference between the right rhetoric with Obama then the left rhetoric with Bush and that it’s a little more shrill. Though I’d argue that the right/Fox news are over-compensating for what they sees as a left-wing liberal media.

Note the Governor does not directly answer Stewart’s questions

The Badger says:

03:07pm | 13/01/11

I’ll see your one and raise you another three.
Find them in this article.

Let’s have a poll, which cartoons are more better.

MarK says:

04:31pm | 13/01/11

Mine is the bestest.

Here endeth the polleth.

Mr. Mustela says:

06:06pm | 13/01/11

Polling has been extended
Badger’s is much more betterer

Mitchell says:

04:03pm | 13/01/11

While you can condemn muslims for having violence in their religious texts, its good to know your religious background contains no violence (like the Crusades? or how about the Inquisition?)
As an atheist i laugh when certain religions claim superiority. Maybe I believe only in the ancient god Thor with his big hammer, you might think i’m ridiculous but who is really being ridiculous? Your great great great grandchildren will certainly know so! They might even laugh at you… silly youngsters!
I don’t know how you expect the decision of a democratically elected council to be reported but it sounds like you expect the ABC in particular to report in a negative manner because that’s how you particularly feel about the issue. 
As someone who reads a lot of news I found reporting of the fact to be on the side of Israel and against Marrickville council and their (incredibly weak and almost only symbolic) decision to speak out against Israel blocking economic trade to a third world country suffering many hardships while Israel sit 50km away enjoying all our 1st world luxuries  
As for Obama….  Is it because he is black?
Do you ever think you are making your racial bias painfully obvious? It’s 2011, a persons skin colour has nothing to do with their ability to govern, lucky for us, because someone like you will never be in control of the worlds only superpower just because you skin pigmentation is lighter than a more capable person. By your reasoning tanned people shouldn’t be elected either… just pale skinny freaks like me!

papachango says:

04:43pm | 13/01/11

@Mitchell - Why should Israel have to trade with a country that wants to kill them? In fact how exactly does one trade with someone that wants to kill one?

Crusades and the Inqusition were certainly barbaric, but it’s interesting that the only examples of such Christian barbarity you can find (fruitloops like the Westboro Baptist Church aside) are from the thirteenth century. Western society has changed a little bit since then - read up on the Reformation and the separation of church and state.

It’s also interesting that you, like these radical islamist nutters, are hung up on events that happened 500 years ago.

I’m not religious by the way, and think the whole ‘mine is the one true God’ thing is bollocks. But I acknowledge that it has some good influences on people, and its harmful influences are much more limited in Western society as we don’t have theocracies any more.

David C says:

03:50pm | 13/01/11

It is very simple James, the reason people mention that quote is to point out the hypocirsy of accusing only Replublicans of hositle comments.
Stay on point friend

Papachango says:

04:26pm | 13/01/11

Hunderds of quotes from elected Republicans calling for Obama and other Democrats’ murder? Links please or admit you are speaking complete bollocks.

Or did you mean republican supporters / anonymous bloggers etc? Let’s not open up this can of worms; there’s crazies on all sides and just as many if not more from the left.

Syl says:

04:32pm | 13/01/11

Its funny when people accuse someone of not producing evidence or quotes then claiming something contradictory (HUNDREDS of quotes) and not producing evidence or quotes.

The point is if Obama (the head of the liberals/democrats) had or does use the same violent imagery as the republicans, it is hypocritical to claim that the Republicans are the ONLY ones to do so.

For more quotes see the footage of pretty much any left wing protest against Bush. Hell go back a few years and watch footage of hippies spitting on soldiers returning from Vietnam.

Violent and hateful imagery and incitement is used by BOTH sides, and extremists on BOTH sides should pull their f*****ing heads in and act more maturely.

David Baker says:

12:33am | 14/01/11

Sad thing is kerry….you’re absolutely right.

Rose says:

12:28am | 14/01/11

I cannot respect Palin on any level, I think her views are dangerous and that she has no place in any civilized government. At the same time I do not think she should be put up as the poster girl for all that is wrong with American politics. It’s far too easy and lazy to blame Palin. The 24 hour news cycle, the need to come up with something new and controversial (something that stands out), the general lowering of the standards of political debate and the lack of real talent in political positions are all contributing to this. The left and the right should both hang their heads in shame at how they have dragged public office down to the gutter and they should apologize to their constituents for being less concerned with doing the right thing by the people and being more concerned with their own agendas. I would love to see people stop aligning themselves with the left or right and actually start thinking about the issues, informing themselves and taking a stand rather than blindly supporting their ‘side’. I do however think I’m asking way too much!

MarK says:

09:27am | 14/01/11

Yes marilyn.

Because Gillard has a POLICY that encourages people to jump on boats and make the trip.

Palin has no policy that I can discern that encourages people to go out and murder.

It really isn’t that hard to see the difference.

Tim says:

06:03pm | 14/01/11

Phil, thank you!

Your comment was so inspiring that I have now seen the errors of my ways.  Tomorrow I will join GetUp! in my quest to become a influential, important person like you.

Thank you!

Bless you!

*sniff*