Assassination by Proxy

I did not have much of an opinion on the recent attempted murder of Arizona democrat Gabrielle Giffords until I read an "analysis" article, by apparent Palin-apologist Howard Kurtz, The Daily Beast's Washington bureau chief and CNN program host.

To contextualize, the shooting of the congresswoman is remarkable not for the surprising ease with which a US congressperson was nearly murdered, but because Giffords' name appeared on a map of the representatives from districts carrying McCain/Palin in '08, who voted for the Obama health care package. The districts were not represented by dots or colored boxes or any other normal indicator, but by gunsight crosshairs, in keeping with Palin's rallying cry, "Don't retreat--RELOAD!"

And on Giffords' Tea Party opponent Jesse Kelly's page, a strange campaign event:

In spite of this, Mr. Kurtz laments in his article's opening: "I hate to say this, but the blame game is already under way." As Giffords is still heavily sedated and in critical condition, Mr. Kurtz feels sorry for Palin as to say that she is "the first to be dragged into this sickening ritual of guilt by association." Though he concedes that the use of crosshairs was "dumb," he believes it is a "long stretch" to hold "a public official accountable for a murderer who opens fire on a political gathering and kills a half dozen people, including a 9-year old girl....This isn't about a nearly year-old Sarah Palin map; it's about a lone nutjob who doesn't value human life."

My head hurts. 

For a journalist pretending to call out rhetoric, I have scarcely read so many rhetorical tricks in so few words. Conceding the absolute minimum that using gunsight crosshairs to pinpoint the socialist traitors in McCain-swinging states who voted for Obamacare is "dumb," he goes on to strike down a very strong accusation that Palin should be held accountable; this he does by characterizing the assault as "open fire" on a gathering which killed six and maimed more innocent people. Including, lest we soon forget, a nine year-old little girl. Clearly, this was a "lone nutjob" who indiscriminately opened fire on a random, absurdly unlucky group of people. 

Except, this is a gross mischaracterization of the actual scene. The congresswoman was not simply caught in said indiscriminate machine gun spray. She was shot at point-blank range, as in gun-to-the-head execution (attempt). Then he sprayed the stunned gathering. An eyewitness, a former ER doctor who actually helped hold down the shooter while waiting for police, said the man walked up and shot Giffords in the head first, reporters at gawker learned.

"...does anyone seriously believe [Palin] was trying to incite violence?" Mr. Kurtz implores the reader. 

Yes, it would be a stretch to say Palin intended this result from her posting the map. Of course, such an active role of trying to incite violence could not be inferred, and certainly cannot be proven. But it is not a stretch, when the scene of the crime and the actions of the shooter are described accurately, to say that the shooter was inspired by Palin's map. Inserting the fact that the map is "nearly a year-old" does nothing to dispel such a connection. Assassination plots aren't concocted over a weekend, not even a three-day one. Were the map posted recently, say, in the last few days or weeks, that would put a connection in a critical light. 

"Let's be honest," Mr. Kurtz writes: "Journalists often use military terminology in describing campaigns. We talk about the air war, the bombshells, targeting politicians, knocking them off, candidates returning fire or being out of ammunition. So we shouldn't act shocked when politicians do the same thing."

Indeed, we are not surprised what depths politicians today will stoop to, and Palin is without doubt no exception to that. However, campaign rhetoric is not the same as a graphic map with gunsight crosshairs. Journalists employing the vivid rhetorical imagery of warfare to most dramatically describe political bouts is a far cry from a politician (I cringed while writing that, I'm sure the reader did as well) posting a map of other politicians who possess opposing ideals, marking them out with gunsight crosshairs and listing their names. This is too far for any politician, let alone one whose platitudes pointedly involve firearms. This is tantamount to, if not literally, a hit list.

If this were not enough, youtube videos posted by the shooter epitomize the tin-foil hat level, anti-government paranoia that Palinites feed on. An inexplicable obsession with a gold standard, as though it is somehow more intrinsically valuable than paper money, facilitating runaway conspiracies of government mind control ("No! I won't pay debt with a currency that's not backed by gold and silver!" shooter writes). Other slides in his videos are unsurprisingly nonsensical, relating to the Mayan 2012 world-end prophecy, and other, even less coherent ideas you might expect Palinites to turn into a hobby.

This is one event in a disturbing trend of extreme, violent right-wing activism shrouded in a cloud of internet-age plausible deniability. Of course it cannot be proven in a court of law that Sarah Palin is guilty of inciting this violence. But that does not eliminate any and all possible inspiration this weekend's murderer may have drawn from Palin's crosshair map. I, for one, find it difficult to believe that a college drop-out, failed military recruit, who posited the following profound(ly nonsensical) syllogism in a youtube video would be moved to attempt an execution of a congresswoman of his own volition: 

If BCE years are unable to start then ADE years are unable to begin. 

BCE years are unable to start. 

Thus, ADE years are unable to begin. 

I can accept that it was an unfortunate coincidence that Arizona federal district court judge John Roll, who ruled in 2009 that a lawsuit brought by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund could proceed against an Arizona rancher, was counted among the deceased victims of the shooting spree. Though he was subjected to numerous death threats and was even placed in protective custody of the U.S. Marshals Service for a month, I will not attempt to infer nefarious right-wing political motivations for this. 

That Sarah Palin's crosshairs map, naming Gabrielle Giffords as a pro-Obamacare Arizonan, was a motivating factor in a crazed anti-government agitator's execution attempt on that congresswoman is not beyond the pale. An attempt that still may prove successful, considering she is still in critical condition and under heavy sedation at time of writing. 

Though a direct and willful connection could never be proved, no one should be satisfied that this morally and ethically exonerates Mrs. Palin from any and all responsibility for this violence. Where does the line of culpability lie in Mr. Kurtz' warped mind? What if someone as radical as Palin was instead a classmate at the shooter's school, and was posting gunsight crosshair maps on hallway bulletins? I think Kurtz would spread some of the responsibility around, and rightly so. Just because the shooter had to mouse-click his way to a website that reinforced and encouraged his violent distrust of public officials does not make him the sole author of his actions. 

That notable news commenters like Howard Kurtz of The Daily Beast champion the plausible deniability of (at best) recklessly irresponsible, violent political slogans and their accompanying web gimmicks is disturbing, and to genuinely believe Palin's hit list played no part in this episode is positively absurd.