Patterico's Pontifications


Palin Making News Again

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:35 pm

[guest post by Dana]

At this weekend’s annual NRA convention, Sarah Palin made waves with her speech. In typical Palin fashion, she captivated her audience and was met with cheers and applause.

One expects the left to be in a tizzy of course, because guns. However, there are a surprising number on the right who have taken her to task for her joke invoking Christianity’s sacrament of baptism with regard to water boarding (beginning at the 6:40 mark). Focusing on the United State’s current counter-terrorism policies, Palin described what she would do if she were in charge,

“Come on. Enemies, who would utterly annihilate America, they who’d obviously have information on plots, to carry out Jihad. Oh, but you can’t offend them, can’t make them feel uncomfortable, not even a smidgen. Well, if I were in charge, they would know that waterboarding is how we’d baptize terrorists.”

Critics scolded that baptism isn’t a good punchline for a terrorist joke; disliked her uniting government with religion and making herself both judge and arbiter; while yet others accused her of sacrilegious jibe and invoking baptism to celebrate torture.

I have excerpted a portion of one writer’s take that caught my eye,

In our attempts to dehumanize our enemy we end up becoming less than human ourselves. It would be a Pyrrhic victory to save civilization and lose our humanity.

We must never hesitate to defend our culture, our future, and our lives against those who seek to destroy us. The liberal cosmopolitan elite appeal to tolerance and understanding in the face of such an enemy is suicidal. However, the right-wing populist position, which is willing to face up to and address the evil of terrorism, fails to understand the ramifications of becoming like the enemy by dehumanizing them.

The entirety focuses on the spiritual implications of Palin’s statement, water boarding, and the Christian. However, along with Palin’s controversial comments and the historical treatment of her by the left/MSM, consider the excerpt in a more broad brush generic way as it relates to politics: Becoming like the enemy. In light of that, what are the limits of how far the right can – and should – go when calling out the hypocrisy, smear tactics and campaigns to destroy by the left? At what point do we start resembling the very people we are attempting to expose? When does it end up becoming self-destructive, thus giving an unintended victory to our opponents? In other words, do we play just as dirty as our opponents and is the risk worth it?

Post script: Palin is not backing down from her comments. When asked if she thought she would make the remark again, she replied,

“Would I make it again?” Palin said. “Why wouldn’t I, yeah, absolutely. Terrorists who want to annihilate Americans, innocent Americans, our children — whatever it takes to stop them. If I were in charge, I’d be stoppin’ em.”

Politicians should take note: Stand by what you say. No backing down, no back pedaling, no “What I really meant to say…” shtick.


83 Responses to “Palin Making News Again”

  1. Terrorists who kill large numbers of random civilians have already dehumanized themselves IMHO.

    David in Cal (a4b47c)

  2. utterly annihilate America

    how is this my problem?

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  3. hoochie needs to wake up and smell the fascist oppression

    it’s not coming from “terrorists”

    it’s coming from Lois Lerner

    it’s coming from Eric Holder

    it’s coming from Vajajay Jarrett

    and it’s coming from Lord God King Food Stamp

    now if “terrorists” want to slaughter them some merkins, after said merkins slaughtered a kajillion muslims in the name of democracy, only to see Lord God King Food Stamp abandon the job before it was done


    cry me a goddamn river

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  4. Murica, eff ya!

    Palin 2016!!!!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  5. you mock

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  6. Critics scolded …
    That’s exactly what they do. Incessantly. Scold, scold. scold. They remind me of the old bat in the Our Gang films who was always getting in a tizzy as a result of the antics of Spanky, Alfalfa, Buckwheat, and Darla and informing them, in a voice quivering with righteous rage,

    I’m going to inform the authorities!

    Waterboarding. How they love to hate waterboarding. I have wondered, from time to time, if Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, if given a vote, would have preferred waterboarding to the treatment they actually received.

    Sarah. What admirable strength of character. Most people would long ago have adopted the John McCain solution by snuggling up to the people who were demeaning the principles and the country they made such hay about when trumpeting their attachments to same.

    Nolanimrod (3c2a2d)

  7. Jeb\Cantor 2016

    mg (31009b)

  8. Jeb is a lover not a winner.

    mg (31009b)

  9. The left’s always been terrified of Sarah. She has tremendous energy and considerable personal charm. And she’s young. And her name is household word. And she knows how to appeal to the other 47%. Maybe 48% even.

    nk (dbc370)

  10. Lerner, Holder, and company, are the enablers, all tied to Soros, the levick grp, prince Talal’s,

    narciso (3fec35)

  11. You get a notion, from the earlier Beast link, where Burlingame, who has identified the enablers, including those who are currently in the administration, is identified as the problem,

    the whole GZ Mosque affair that we went through where Bloomberg, Stay Puft, Obama all ‘removed all doubt, the Arab Spring, that turned cold, the push to have us be AQ’s aircover in Syria,

    narciso (3fec35)

  12. This is a very, very well-selected topic.

    “In our attempts to dehumanize our enemy we end up becoming less than human ourselves.”

    T think the crux of the matter will be found here.

    Man created in God’s image, or having been, irreparably fallen? Is the Creation on a path of sanctification, or a path of annihilation?

    Are the passages from James and 1 John indicative of successful conquest over sin or of volition primarily?

    Was the healing of the ear struck by Peter from the legionnaire’s head an example for all Christians or that of God among us?

    I answering these questions we will invariably be discerning between spirits, those of Christianity, Humanism, Nihilism, etc.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  13. 12. Cont. Although I cast the foregoing questions in a dualistic form, that manner is for clarity only.

    Good and evil, black and white, hot and cold, the relief expressive of underlying reality or simplisme?

    One thing I am certain of, Allah isn’t god, Islam itself is the ‘Abomination causing Desolation’.

    The question I’d pursue: is a Christian warrior conceivable?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  14. 9. I’m conflicted. Cruz really belongs on the legal arm, AG, Chief Justice.

    Walker is a loyal partisan, a fine choice for POTUS but suspect for the lures of Party.

    Palin is a warrior. 2017 looks at this point to be the domain of War.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  15. General Tagubas investigation into torture revealed anal rape with objects was often used to loosen up suspects for interrogation. Perhaps that is Sarah’s religion way of giving them their First Communion?

    bob (22ac29)

  16. I don’t like to bother God about these things. He’s got enough on His hands watching sparrows fall. And the Devil can’t hardly keep up either with seven billion people in the world these days. We can make our own judgments on how we behave towards other human beings and each time we do we pass judgment on ourselves too.

    I, personally, don’t think we should abuse prisoners. I think that when you have deprived a man of his freedom you are responsible to provide for him the comforts and necessities he would provide himself were he free. It’s not a complicated philosophical issue. It’s possibly an esthetic issue. Torture is ugly.

    nk (dbc370)

  17. 15. Interrogation or buggery?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  18. 16. A bit too abstract an emotive for our use Counselor.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  19. Abu Ghraib happened because there was no supervision, no method of operating, but it was an isolated event, proper administration of this technique yielded results;

    narciso (3fec35)

  20. Abu Ghraib happened because no-account degenerate hillbilly trash were put in charge of prisoners.

    nk (dbc370)

  21. 16. I think prisoners suspected of having information worthy of learning should be interrogated.

    The import of the information strictly determines the techniques employed.

    In general, war cannot be made compassionate. While any job worth doing is worth doing badly, taking prisoners in war should be purposeful.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  22. Abu Ghraib happened because the US has lost the knack for war. They have learned the attitude for the gulag.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  23. 16. A bit too abstract an emotive for our use Counselor.

    After your 12 and 13? Err … ok.

    It is difficult to put concepts like this in something (language) originally devised to tell other monkeys where the bananas were ripe. That’s true.

    nk (dbc370)

  24. At bottom the question is one of whether survival is worth pursuing.

    If so, one’s job “is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor dumb bastard die for his.”

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  25. I don’t think that’s it, recall at the time the Congress was stingy with funds for prison building and maintenance, trying to do things on the cheap,

    narciso (3fec35)

  26. 24. I was setting up the dilemma, you were beginning with an answer. Two different tasks, no?

    “16.I don’t like to bother God about these things..We can make our own judgments on how we behave towards other human beings and each time we do we pass judgment on ourselves too.”

    What flavor of religion is this? I can’t pick it out.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  27. It’s along the lines of “They had the Commandments, they had the prophets”.

    nk (dbc370)

  28. recall when there is any attempt at spreading the faith, it is considered haram, even when done with private funds, even though the likes of Alamoudi have free reign in our chaplaincies and our prisons,

    narciso (3fec35)

  29. Andersonville and Auschwitz were alike inhumane.

    OTOH, should King Rats be excluded. Shelter yes, comfort why?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  30. War is not equivalent with kinetic military action. Film of Ghaddafi’s compound satisfies my definition of war.

    However, the Libyan action was broken off sometime before conditions conducive to Peace were achieved.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  31. overbroad, one was an extermination camp, the other was a mere detention facility, poorly managed, I guess Abu Ghraib falls into the latter group

    narciso (3fec35)

  32. Remember the rhetoric of those who commanded in WWII. I’ll just use “Bull” Halsey as an example but Patton would work just as well.
    “Before we’re done with them, the Japanese language will be spoken only in Hell!”
    “We can share the Pacific with the Japs. We’ll have the top and they can have the bottom.”
    The difference is that the greatest generation won their war. We’re too worried about offending the sensibilities of barbarians who mutilate children to be able to win ours.

    mkstach (4b7246)

  33. Abu Ghraib happened because no-account degenerate hillbilly trash were put in charge of prisoners.

    And Fort Hood and Nidal Hasan happened because of whom and what?

    Mark (59e5be)

  34. gary, I’ll bring it closer to Earth. Unlike Scalia, and his qualified sovereign immunity, I don’t consider “I didn’t know better” a defense for crimes committed by governments.

    nk (dbc370)

  35. 33. Agreed. War is hell.

    However, permitting Dar al Harb to persist until the West is subjected is our current path.

    Is that strategy Christian?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  36. And Fort Hood and Nidal Hasan happened because of whom and what?

    Circumcision. Muslim boys are also circumcised, as a requirement of their religion, and Nidal Hassan was irreparably damaged by the trauma.

    nk (dbc370)

  37. In light of that, what are the limits of how far the right can – and should – go when calling out the hypocrisy, smear tactics and campaigns to destroy by the left?

    Calling out, is telling the truth. Smearing is lying.

    You should never tell things you do not believe to be true.

    And you need good judgement. This is not the same thing as kind or favorable judgement. With some people you need to assume the worst.

    When I say that Bill Clinton murdered the Branch Davidians in Waco on April 19, 1995, I am on very, very, sound ground.

    But you have to be careful not to buy the wrong stories as to how the fire was set etc.. To quote Carol Moore, who once wrote to me: (in 1993)

    As with many other things in life, one must be discriminating in giving credence to
    various conspiracy theories. Some are totally
    on target, others off the wall, with a whole
    range in between. Some are enragingly true,
    some fun, some tedious, some just plain annoying.

    At what point do we start resembling the very people we are attempting to expose?

    When you lie, or when you start drawing unjustified invidious conclusions from campaign finance records. But it might be OK just to show how absurd it can get.

    When does it end up becoming self-destructive,

    When you make mistakes.

    By the way, NOT making charges, when there is reasonable suspicion, can be a mistake.

    In other words, do we play just as dirty as our opponents

    Never. But you shouldn’t define even making charges of murder as dirty.

    It all depends on the facts.

    and is the risk worth it?

    With someone who plays dirty, there’s more risk in doing nothing, or latching on to plausible sounding advice. Above all don’t drop an argument or a defense just when ut begins to backfire.

    You should also offer positive reasons for your candidate.

    Sammy Finkelman (f61675)

  38. 21. Comment by nk (dbc370) — 4/29/2014 @ 6:16 am

    Abu Ghraib happened because no-account degenerate hillbilly trash were put in charge of prisoners.

    Because George W. Bush thought there could be nothing wrong with people who had run prisons, especially in the state of Texas, and not been dismissed for wrongdoing, and such a pewrson needed no further vetting.

    Sammy Finkelman (f61675)

  39. No one just took this as a red meat line in a NRA speech? She should be president just because of her ability to absorb criticism and keep on point.

    BradnSA (77b8e4)

  40. 35. Well, Ok. Nuremberg pertains.

    OTOH, I’d propose anytime lawyers are involved, the War has been concluded.

    Keeping victims of torture alive as hostages for future employ is itself a court martial offense.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  41. Hyperbole is only reserved for the Democrats, they can accuse you of murder, adultery, enbezzlement, tax evasion, without challenge,

    narciso (3fec35)

  42. 40. Unfortunately, she’s hot, and her gender will not permit same to aspire to the office.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  43. The ones I read about were reservist MPs under the command of some lady brigadier with a Polish last name. I know the sergeant at the core of the abuse was a prison guard in his civilian job. Any more?

    nk (dbc370)

  44. Karpinski, who passed the buck to Israel on Al Jazeera, Graner, that was the one,

    narciso (3fec35)

  45. and Nidal Hassan was irreparably damaged by the trauma.

    Probably also because the ethos of same-sex marriage has yet to be embraced throughout the Islamic world.

    Mark (59e5be)

  46. Frankly, Abu Ghraib does not rise to my level of minimal interest.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  47. Ask Pacific War veterans if it “dehumanized” them to adopt the same tactics their Japanese foes used, when attempting to take those god-forsaken islands in the Pacific: Tarawa, Saipan, Iwo Jima…

    The object is to WIN, not become a noble, but dead victim because you refused to “stoop to your opponents’ level.”

    Conservatives need to adopt the old saying:
    “Win first. Then do good!”

    Earl T (9a158f)

  48. Had Palin said marinate instead of baptize the left’s hate mongering character assassins would have claimed she was advocating cannibalism.

    ropelight (ed9504)

  49. Was leaving Fallujah identifiable prior to declaring ‘Mission Accomplished’ wise or stupid?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  50. Well that’s an interesting point, Fallujah was a Sunni redoubt, however Steyn visited there in the early months, and it was a relatively settled place,
    then the chose poorly by inviting the Salafi,

    narciso (3fec35)

  51. Was saving Sunni Iraq in order to find evidence of WMD an example of a police action or of war?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  52. 51. Good point, I remember the article.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  53. 51. So the question of pursuing a Just War, as far as Iraq is concerned, is open to further investigation.

    Obviously we went wrong, just where is still to be articulated.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  54. I’m willing to accept, at this point, that in Afghanistan failure at Tora Bora ought to have concluded that action.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  55. No, one battle does not a war make, the problem is the ISI was serving as UBL’s logistical arm,

    narciso (3fec35)

  56. In other words, do we play just as dirty as our opponents and is the risk worth it?

    To answer that question, we must answer the question of it our opponents benefit when they play dirty?

    Michael Ejercito (becea5)

  57. 57. A central goal of war is to settle, with significant finality, differences between nations over limited resources and spheres of influence which, if permitted to remain unresolved, will result in greater dislocation, suffering and death than war itself.

    As a solution, this means destroying the enemy’s will to pursue the conflict. Carpet bombing Japan with incendiaries did not accomplish that necessity.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  58. 56. Well, did we screw up making Afghanistan into a war? If we’re unwilling to prosecute a war to its conclusion is it wise to proceed?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  59. Well, the Spartans did not even take prisoners or pursue the deserting enemy. On the other hand, the Romans were nothing more than thieves, rapists, arsonists and slavetakers after they won the battle. Both were pretty successful militarily. So, does allowing your troops to become like bandits degrade their military capability, or is it “boys will be boys” and they’ll be fine when the shooting starts again?

    nk (dbc370)

  60. Well the last time, we abandoned Afghanistan to the preferred Saudi and Pakistani proxies, and we know what happened subsequently,

    narciso (3fec35)

  61. I still wonder whether Palin’s waterboarding metaphoric approval wasn’t a deliberated move to cut her loose forever from McLame.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  62. 61. Agreed. Islam is evil.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  63. Death by firing squad, with bullets smeared with pig tallow.
    Burial in a sarcophagus made from pig bladders.

    Worked for Black-Jack Pershing in the PI then, it’ll work again.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  64. 60. A fruitful line of inquiry. Greek mercenaries were used by other armies in the Levant, whereas the Roman legions were often mercenary armies.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  65. 60. Did either use women as combatants or jailors? The Germans employed the latter.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  66. Comment by nk (dbc370) — 4/29/2014 @ 6:07 am

    Solution: Take No Prisoners!

    In a war outside the boundaries of the Geneva Conventions on Land Warfare, with combatants who wear no distinctive uniform (aka, your usual terrorist), if they survive the battlefield, they should be interrogated immediately for any intel they may have, and then shot.
    End of Problem.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  67. “No one just took this as a red meat line in a NRA speech?”

    BradnSA – That’s exactly how I took it, unlike the clucking church ladies on this thread.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  68. 68. Well, I do think taking weapons off the table in war is counter productive.

    OTOH, excising genitals and sticking them in mouths is also counter productive and criminal.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  69. Comment by gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 4/29/2014 @ 7:57 am

    But, the carpet-bombing laid the predicate for convincing the Emperor that all that he knew was in danger of being lost when he saw Hiroshima and Nagasaki, for all practical purposes, disappear in an instant, and that the only thing that could save his people was the surrender of the government.
    The fact that it was relayed to him via back-channels that the institution of the Imperial Household could continue was also influential.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  70. 70. Good points.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  71. Is Sarah Palin running for any office? Does she have any authority to order extreme interrogation methods?

    Bueller? Bueller?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  72. BradnSA – That’s exactly how I took it, unlike the clucking church ladies on this thread.

    Since I view fundamentalist Islam as about on par with the Nazi ideology, I had no problem with this at all.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  73. I still wonder whether Palin’s waterboarding metaphoric approval wasn’t a deliberated move to cut her loose forever from McLame.

    She keeps rushing to his defense, but I’ve never seen the reverse be true.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  74. It’s all part of the Levick wurlitzer whether they know it or not, to keep any consideration of such tactics, beyond the pail, that’s the reason behind
    the Senate intelligence report,

    narciso (3fec35)

  75. Jeb\Cantor 2016
    A lover and a loser.

    mg (31009b)

  76. 76. LOL. I am not encouraged that there is any upside to continuing residence on this plantation.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  77. 72. No, what of it?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  78. She has some kind of cooking show is my understanding. But you have to have cable to see it.

    Also she really really likes Christmas.

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  79. I’m getting really sick of all the politicians on the right where everybody clutches their pearls and stumbles onto the fainting couch when somebody makes a provocative statement. It’s all just an act, of course, which makes it even more embarrassing. I’m no particular fan of Sarah Palin, but she says what she thinks and doesn’t back down. The GOP needs to grow a pair.

    Funeral Guy (26d185)

  80. 79. ‘The GOP needs to grow a pair.’

    Time to plow the current crop under as manure.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  81. I’m no particular fan of Sarah Palin

    I wonder if your need to insert the qualifying words of “I’m no particular fan of…,” of and by itself, is a sign of social-political trends making all of us, as they say, ball-less. IOW, the influence of modern-day speech codes crafted and triggered by the left. Codes that make our culture both far more vulgar and trashy — far more dumbed down — yet also far more “prim” and “proper” (ie, where it was considered good etiquette to tolerate an anti-America-spouting US military enlistee right up until the day he out on a murder spree at a US Army base).

    Mark (59e5be)

  82. or it might could be he just doesn’t like her all that much

    happyfeet (8ce051)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4033 secs.