Originally published on January 12, 2011.
I know, my use of the term on-target makes me a vitriolic, hateful rhetoric espouser in the eyes of some. It’s not conducive to the “new tone” we are all supposed to embrace for some unfathomable and delusional reason. Of course, this new tone doesn’t apply if one is speaking about Sarah Palin, who is apparently the cause of All Bad Things Ever, in perpetuity. Even here, we are on day three of no school due to snow. In South Carolina. Does Palin’s evil reach have no bounds?!
The Left and the media, as always concentric circles on a Venn diagram, attempted for days to spin a false and odious narrative placing blame for the shooting in Tucson on Sarah Palin and everyone like her. Because, vitriol. Or something. Days of vile political opportunism, on the backs of the dead. Days of disgusting smears the likes of which I’ve never seen before in my lifetime. Days of giddily and gleefully exploiting deaths, including those of a federal judge and a nine-year-old child, all in an attempt to score political points and to silence and demonize those with whom they disagree.
That the facts did not support such claims even one iota meant nothing. In fact, they absolutely ignored all evidence and truths and proceeded to just make stuff up. All focused on Sarah Palin, who miraculously manages to be a dumb old chick from the sticks and the most evil person alive. She’s kind of like George W. Bush that way, I suppose. Chris Matthews went so far as to put a graphic up during his show last night with Sarah Palin’s picture, reading underneath “Silent: On The Lam.” On. The. Lam. As if some fugitive, implying that she, along with the Tea Party, is somehow responsible for a massacre perpetrated by a madman.
A pitch perfect response, both from the heart and smart. Naturally, that then caused the Left to lose whatever tenuous grip they had left on reality. See, Sarah Palin was bad for being “silent and on the lam” last night. But, today, she is super icky for responding and not remaining silent. After being accused for days of having “blood on her hands” and of being responsible for the acts of a madman. Who, incidentally, apparently did not even watch nor listen to the news and, therefore, likely did not even have any knowledge of the supposedly evil cross-hairs graphic. Or anything else for that matter. It was clear almost immediately that the Left was actually upset because her response was exactly correct. Based not just on emotion – actual heartfelt emotion – but on facts and reason. Pesky old reason! That does not suit. The new “in” thing is complete fabrications, mixed with a healthy dose of utter delusion. Therefore, the smears continued, predictably.
First came speculation from Ben Smith at Politico, and others, that Sarah Palin was ‘stirring the pot” with the use of the phrase blood libel and that the phrase must have been fed to her by someone who “got” the context. Oh, no, that dum-dum rube obviously doesn’t know the historical context and just somehow randomly came up with that phrase while prattling inanely and brushing her hair, soon to be distracted by something shiny. History! That’s for boys! She was also decried for the use of the phrase itself, even though it’s been used many times by others and is a common phraseology in the political world. It is also absolutely accurate in this instance.
Next came Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) in a desperate act of projection.