I just want to take a dump on her head. What a false, heartless wench.

Well, we definitely want her on the Republican ticket.

I don't. I would actually be much happier if the GOP could nominate someone who is not cynical, stupid, narcissistic, or incompetent for the first time since Dole.

I mean, wouldn't it be nice if the election was a contest between two decent, acceptable people? If politics wasn't this never-ending war with flaming idiots bent on dismantling the government?

So, basically my ideal scenario is that she bites it in the primaries as hard as Guiliani did, and we can all have a nice laugh, and then they nominate someone good.

" . . . and then they nominate someone good."

Pollyannish much? :)

Yeah, obviously the scenario you describe would be ideal, but I'm not willing to take that chance (and neither should you) given the other likely candidates. Give me a "P", give me an "A", . . .

More incendiary language. She just doesn't know when to shut her mouth. Do we want someone this stupid representing the U.S. on the world stage?

Well, we definitely want her on the Republican ticket. I know, I know, that's playing with fire, but I'm pretty confident that would hand the election to Obama. And just think about the televised debates. I can't imagine anything quite as delectable. I'd give up going to the Euro Cup to watch her debate Obama. I love her, that crazy bitch.

Once again Palin was given a golden opportunity to say something to elevate herself to political power, and she blew it. I've seen her gubernatorial resignation speech three times and have no idea what she was talking about, but then again, neither do most people.

Exactly. On a day when the House pays tribute to the dead and wounded and the President heads to Arizona for a memorial service, Sarah Palin, instead of trying to heal wounds, chooses to make a defensive speech using a historically- and emotionally-loaded phrase to rile her base and turn attention onto herself. Disgusting.

“"Hi. This is Sarah Palin. Is Senator Lieberman in?"

"No, governor. This is Yom Kippur."

"Well, can I leave a message, Mr. Kippur?"”

I'd at least respect her a little bit if she just owned up to it and said "I was wrong and will be more careful of the imagery and language I use in the future." But I never realistically expected that to happen either.

Oh, she cannot show any weakness! She's a renegade maverick wolf-shootin' hard-fishin' snow-lovin' wilderness gal!

She didn't even have to say that. A simple, "Let's all tone it down" would have been better...

Instead, she just parrots others who inappropriately used "blood libel" too...

Where's BottomlessChips? He couldn't write enough to defend Palin and the conservatives in the last few days, and yet he's strangely silent here.

"But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."

It's funny, Sarah, but I don't see any liberals calling for any Second Amendment solutions against you. In fact, I don't see any threats at all. All people are saying is, "Try thinking about the consequences before opening your trap, you stupid bimbo!"

Ha. Just getting to lunch now. Busy morning.

Again, I'm not a Palin supporter. I have never and will never give her money. I would never vote for her or any ticket she's on (see: 2008). I get annoyed at the terrible name she gives conservatism. I can't really cite much of her platform, since I was turned off immediately when she hit the national scene. And I only read about her mostly when liberals complain about her.

If you all hate her so much, you are certainly doing a good job of increasingly her visibility at the same time.

It's like the research analyst to Paul Giamatti in "Private Parts"...Those who like (Howard) Stern listen for an hour a day. Those who love him listen for two hours. Those hate him listen for four. (paraphrasing)

(The only time I was mildly impressed with her was when I felt she beat Biden in one of their VP debates. I chalk that up mostly to Biden being a terrible speaker, though.)

The topic at hand is how to address the issue of violence itself. Have we here the ability to communicate our best ideas intelligently?

Emotions and ideas are very different. Emotions are ours to feel and inwardly attend to, not to aggressively impose upon the public at large. Emotions may be discussed thoughtfully, but emotional attacks are never wise or helpful. Our helpful ideas are the most important topics to be discussed because they concern positive action for actual change for the better.

Our country is groaning under the immense burden of too much hatred and selfishness. We are breaking its back with our fearfulness and selfish concerns. Fear and finger pointing are the easiest responses; both are initially the most obvious and knee-jerk. Allow those thoughts to pass by and don't heed them.

Now, find the real important, pertinent questions. How might we find solutions to such tragic occurrences? How might we use our intelligence to improve social and political conditions? How might we use our imaginative minds to find ways to live with one another less painfully, and perhaps even more happily? What are some better ways for all of us to do good for one another?

The lovely, hopeful child and others who died, and the hopeful, intelligent woman who was shot, along with innocent others who had gathered with the idea of finding solutions for society's troubles-- they were there to work towards positive solutions. They were each there seeking helpful, hopeful solutions from the audience or as listeners. They were there with open minds.

Let's ask ourselves how we can best be part of the solution for the messes we have to face. Lets ask ourselves how we can be of help. Now is a time when neighbor must help neighbor. There is too much pain and hurt already.

Let's become examples here of healing public discourse. Let's monitor our own rhetoric and make it do more than describe the problems. Let us kiss the wound and make it better.

>> If you all hate her so much, you are certainly doing a good job of increasingly her visibility at the same time. >>

WE are? Nah.

Gothamist is a pretty liberal site. Certain editors here will post about her pretty frequently.

"We" was a general pronoun encompassing a lot of people in my post.

As much as I tend to disagree with "BottomlessChips" (who is likely working), baiting him is not playing nice.

Can't we all just get along??

FYI…. Rasmussen asked 1000 voters: "Was the recent shooting in Arizona the result of political anger in the country or was it just a random act of violence by an unstable person?”

...just 28% of Adults say the shooting in Arizona was the result of political anger in the country. Fifty-eight percent (58%) say instead that it was a random act of violence by an unstable person. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Republicans and 56% of adults not affiliated with either of the major political parties view the shooting as a random act of violence. Even Democrats by a 48% to 37% margin agree, although leading members of their party have attributed the shootings to a climate of anger they say has been generated by opponents of President Obama.

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...

I hope her future graphics depict getting hugs!

LEAVE SARAH ALONE!!!

I kid. Don't leave her alone. Take her (and any other politician who can't vet a proper speech writer) to task for her apparent ignorance, and expect more from public figures, both those elected and those self-appointed after quitting. I'm tired of the violent rhetoric, even if it's not causal.