7 thoughts on “I’m With Professor Jacobson”

  1. Yup, me too!

    Apparently as written is to short – maybe this will help.
    Rand, how about allowing one, two or three word comments? Is it possible?

  2. Probably, but I’d have to hack the code of something (Akismet?) and I don’t have the time to figure it out. There’s no obvious option for it in WordPress.

  3. I don’t if I want to see her win to spite others. However, I’m not a big proponent of sitting on the sideline while others attack her as somehow responsible for another’s skullduggery. There’s just so much wrong with it.

    Being perfectly honest (not because I wasn’t before, but I suspect others may not believe this, so I qualify…); I actually believed that Palin must have created (or rather sanctioned the creation) a picture that had Gabby Giffords face inside a sniper like crosshair (such as Harry Mitchell did to JD Hayworth). I simply accepted the early reports about it as plausible, and thus true. So I didn’t defend her, because I agree that such a graphic is too much grandstanding (such as the electrocuted Elephant discussed in the cosmiclog link in the next thread). When I finally saw the crosshairs were on a map, I was astonished anyone even mentioned it.

    How else does one mark a map? A pin perhaps, but really crosshairs are just a way of pointing out a location. When I search Google Earth, it puts crosshairs on a location and zooms in. I don’t think of it as violent.

    See, I’m still discussing this nonsense weeks later, because the notion is just absurd. I don’t care about Palin, I care about rational discourse. For example, terrorists today attacked a Moscow airport. No one is blaming Bush’s/Blair’s policy in Iraq for it, because they can’t. No one is blaming a map by Palin, because they can’t. No one is blaming Israel, because they can’t. There is some blame for Russia’s handling of neighbors, but otherwise… In the US media, the people responsible for the bombing of a Moscow airport are the people who actually carried out the bombing of a Moscow airport. That’s rational.

  4. As much as I’d like to see the collective lefts heads explode; I’ve come to realize that all those that say they like her but don’t think she’s qualified to be president all seem to have superficial reasons for saying so. She has two outstanding reasons for being president. Her policies are agreeable and she’s been fully, completely and absolutely inoculated from the false accusations of the left…

    Oh, I guess I should have just said I want to see heads explode? I’m ready for my red button now, Mr. Demille.

  5. A pin perhaps, but really crosshairs are just a way of pointing out a location.

    To pick a nit: when I look down my scope, the horizontal and vertical lines do not extend beyond the diameter of the scope (neat trick if it did…). The symbols on the (now infamous) map are registration markers and are used all the time in lithographic processes.

    Now the bullseye one the Dem’s used, yeah.. that’s an archery target.

  6. Good point Titus. I’ve called them surveyor marks, or hatch marks in the past. Indeed, they are not even crosshairs.

    By the way, less we forget; there is evidence of a lefty so enraged by Palin, that he shot his own television because Palin’s daughter was on it. But meh, no MSM discussion of the rhetoric of hate having any bearing of that person’s actions.

Comments are closed.