DADDY

NYT Forced To Apologize For Resurrecting Sarah Palin Map Conspiracy Theory

A New York Times opinion piece equates a tactic used by a Sarah Palin PAC to the shooting of Majority House Whip Steve Scalise.

The latest and greatest in fake news can be found exclusively at The New York Times these days.

Today, they’re tying the shooting of Majority House Whip Steve Scalise to a campaign mailer used by a Sarah Palin related Political Action Committee. According to the article, the PAC’s use of crosshairs or targets over targeted voting districts was the best example of inciting political violence they could think of and it seems to excuse celebrities from having faux-beheadings of the President of the United States.

The New York Times opinion piece tries very hard to make it seem like Sarah Palin was responsible for the shooting of Gabby Giffords and that the shooting of Majority House Whip Steve Scalise was merely a side effect of a declining political climate. They fail to mention that both shooters were liberals and that Giffords’ shooter had nothing to do with Sarah Palin.

The asinine “rationale” behind the Palin map conspiracy theory is that the target seen over Arizona in the map above was responsible for Gabby Giffords’ shooting in 2011.

The article attempts to politicize and re-hash the tragic 2011 shooting of Gabrielle Giffords…

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, when Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl, the link to political incitement was clear. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.

The Times Opinion piece cites an ABC article which explains a little bit about Gabby Giffords’ shooter, which the New York Times managed to leave out…

Many criticized any links being made in the media between the Arizona shooting and Palin, particularly since some accounts from Arizona note that accused gunman Jared Loughner was involved at some point with “liberal” politics and his MySpace profile listed The Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books.

An acquaintance of Loughner’s, Caitie Parker, who said she was in school and in a band with him, described him on Twitter as “more libertarian & definitely socially liberal.”

The New York Times actually had to submit a ‘correction’ afterward clarifying that there was no connection between the crosshairs on the political ad and the shooting…

Correction: June 15, 2017 An earlier version of this editorial incorrectly stated that a link existed between political incitement and the 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords. In fact, no such link was established.

Where they did submit a correction on their Giffords’ claim they seem to be able to throw around ‘indisputable’ facts about gun control in the NYT article:

Was this attack evidence of how readily available guns and ammunition are in the United States? Indisputably.

Sources:
New York Times
ABC

3 Comments

3 Comments

  1. AlexCorvidae

    June 15, 2017 at 5:08 pm

    This is getting f’ing ridiculous. They keep the Palin stuff in and put a “But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.” at the end of the paragraph. In these situations they should have to take the article down and replace it with a page that says ” We are either liars, incompetent, or just really bad at our jobs.”

  2. digital marketing as a service

    December 9, 2017 at 11:21 pm

    It’s a pity you don’t have a donate button! I’d withot a doubt
    donate to this fantastic blog! I supplose for now i’ll
    settle for bookmarkinng and adding your RSS feed
    to my Google account. I look forward to brand new updates and will talk about this website with my Facebook group.
    Talk soon!

  3. Surya Utama Putra

    December 12, 2017 at 8:26 pm

    It is perfect time too make a few plans for the long run and it
    is time to be happy. I have read this publish and iff I could
    I wish to recommend you some attention-grabbing issues or advice.
    Perhaps you could write next articles referring
    to thius article. I wish to learn even more things
    about it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top