Sarah Palin is not responsible for the horrible tragedy Tucson and she didn’t make Jared Lee Loughner pull the trigger on the gun that killed so many people. Loughner was a disturbed man who is clearly insane.
But for Sarah Palin’s “Take Back the 20” campaign, was the use of targets, bulls eyes and gun references really necessary? Did the language really need to be so gun oriented? In March, Palin Tweeted a message to her supporters:
“Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: ‘Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!’ Pls see my Facebook page.”
Sarah Palin is one example of how polarizing American politics has become. Palin’s Take Back the 20 campaign used over-the-top language, just like many political campaigns do these days, on the right and on the left.
But if there is any good to come out of this horrible Tucson tragedy, it will be that the political rhetoric will calm down to a reasonable level.
Reuters reports that Senator Lamar Alexander, a member of the Republican leadership in the Senate said “We ought to cool it, tone it down.”
Pima County Arizona Clarence Dunnik told reporters his views on how politics can fuel unbalanced people like Jared Loughner:
“When the rhetoric about hatred, about mistrust of government, about paranoia of how government operates, and to try to inflame the public on a daily basis, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, has impact on people especially who are unbalanced personalities”
When the news broke that Democrat Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and had been shot at a congressional event, the buzz began building about the fact that Giffords had been a target of Sarah Palin’s “Take Back the 20″ campaign. Today a Palin aide explains that Sarah Palin’s now infamous image was never meant to evoke violence or guns.
Palin’s “Take Back the 20” campaign has been taken down since the shooting.
What do you think? Do you think our Politicians need to cool it a little on the harsh rhetoric?