In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Joe-Wilson-inspired “You Lie!” rifle available for sale in South Carolina

Jill

What could possibly go wrong here?

A South Carolina gun and accessories company is selling semi-automatic rifle components inscribed with “You lie” – a tribute to the infamous words of 2nd District Republican Congressman Joe Wilson when he shouted at President Barack Obama during a congressional speech about national health care reform in the fall of 2009.

“Palmetto State Armory would like to honor our esteemed congressman Joe Wilson with the release of our new ‘You Lie’ AR-15 lower receiver,” reads a portion of the company’s website.

But yeah, suggesting that conservatives are mixing politics and violence is “blood libel,” akin to the anti-Semitic slur that Jews kill Christian babies and use their blood to make matzoh. This person on Facebook is definitely right. Sarah is for sure the biggest victim here. Being criticized is way worse than being shot in the head. I think we can all agree on that.

Thanks, Foster, for the link.

24 thoughts on Joe-Wilson-inspired “You Lie!” rifle available for sale in South Carolina

  2. This seems like the worst timing for this kind of thing to come out.

    Maybe I’ve got selective memeory but I don’t remember the anti-Bush rhetoric being as violent. Rude, yes, you tend to be rude when bashing someone but I can’t remember as much violence.

  3. If such a thing was present shortly before the Civil War, I’m sure it would be possible to own your own look-alike cane, the same kind used to beat down the Northern oppressors.

    An exact replica of the cane used to fell Radical Socialist Abolitionist Charles Sumner can be yours! Pay $10 extra and have it engraved with your own initials!

  4. Zoe: This seems like the worst timing for this kind of thing to come out.
    Maybe I’ve got selective memeory but I don’t remember the anti-Bush rhetoric being as violent. Rude, yes, you tend to be rude when bashing someone but I can’t remember as much violence.  

    It’s several months old and they appear not to be offering the lower anymore.

    I wonder how much extra they charged for small letters on the mag well

  5. “You have blood on your hands” is not “criticism”. How would you prefer people refer to blaming someone for the death of innocents without evidence? Blood libel seems rather apt. And its not like this is the first time the term has been used in this context.

    People who immediately look to blame their ideological opponents when something tragic happens are assholes, end of story. That’s true if you blame homosexuals and feminists for 9/11, and it’s true here. For the record, I could give a shit about Sarah Palin, but this isn’t just about her.

  7. I think the fact that Sarah Palin and other conservatives refuse to do what they should- completely and totally pledge to stop using violent imagery and rhetoric and backtrack on what they’ve used already- means that they are 100% open to ‘criticism’, or attacks. This is the kind of thing that SHOULD take these people out of office, even if they didn’t have anything directly to do with it. I don’t think Sarah Palin put that gun in that guy’s hand, but I think she played a very important role, and leaving her out is unacceptable. I think she should be charged with incitement to violence. I don’t think there will ever be a case quite this clear-cut in the near future- at least, I hope. I mean, the victim came on television- BEFORE the shootings- and said explicitly “this is something that could happen, that’s why you shouldn’t do things like this, if something does happen, it will be bad.”

  8. “I think that appropriating that kind of history, Henry, shows an appalling lack of common decency.”

    So does using a mass murder to slander ideological opponents without merit or evidence. See Raavequeen above for exactly what I mean.

    Honestly, I guess it depends on what you mean by “appropriating”. If Palin or Brietbart were the first people to use the term “blood libel” to describe a similar activity, I could see your point. But they’re not, it’s not an uncommon usage. This is basically another excuse to get offended by someone you don’t care for.

  9. Henry, you’re now the one making assumptions without evidence here. You have no idea what my history is with the term or appropriation of oppression in that way, you have no idea what my history is with the “someones” in question here: I am from Australia and had never heard of Breitbart before today, I am not invested here. It’s not an excuse to say that I think blood libel is in no way similar to ‘slander[ing] ideological opponents’ and it’s incredibly inappropriate to use it for that purpose. I always think it’s inappropriate; I don’t think it not being an uncommon usage in your experience mitigates anything. It’s indecent in an entirely different manner, just like I’m not going to compare your impugning of my motives here to, hmm, blood libel! For goodness sake.

    Sorry for the derail, Jill, but I’m sure you understand.

  10. Henry, if you’re arguing for a more well rounded picture here, I support that. But if you’re saying that the hate speech and violent rhetoric being employed by people like Palin, Beck, etc. had nothing at all to do with the Arizona shooting, you’re absolutely wrong.

    In 2008, I watched a U.S. Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken here in Minnesota that was filled with vile, personalized attacks from both sides. It nearly drove me to vote for a third party candidate who’s views I agreed with less, but who’s approach was much more civil and respectful. Looking back, and given my long record of choosing third party candidates, I can see where the decision I made that year was about giving into fear – a fear partly manufactured by the vileness of the two major party campaigns.

    If someone like me, who is well informed and willing to move beyond party lines can be influenced by nasty, hate-filled political rhetoric, than it’s damn well sure that someone like the Arizona shooter could be influenced.

    There’s a difference, too, between assigning direct blame and pointing out influences on people involved in violent crimes. People do not live in vacuums. The culture around us moves within each of us as well. And if you look at how pundits, bloggers, media personalities, and politicians are speaking about their opponents, it’s gotten totally brutal. And this brutality has spread into the general public, often in destructive ways.

    What I find laughable about this whole discussion is that those who argue that people like Palin are completely innocent here would probably respond the opposite if they were the target of such speech.

    It’s easy enough to defend tongue and cheek death threat rhetoric when it’s made by some public figure, maybe one that you support. But when the same rhetoric is aimed at you, suddenly it becomes real, doesn’t it? Of course, most of the people blathering about Loughner as an “isolated nutjob” have never been a calculated target of violent rhetoric. They’re just armchair pundits themselves, trying to avoid taking a deep look at the serious mess our society is now in because more and more people are invested in winning, being right, and controlling power at any costs, including human lives.

  11. @Nathan – I’m not arguing that Palin is innocent because I don’t think violent rhetoric can influence people. I’m arguing that she’s innocent because there is no evidence that in this case, her (or anyone else’s) rhetoric influenced this guy. Nothing that has come out indicates that he was motivated by political views at all, besides “I don’t like government mind control” and “Gabrielle Giffords is unintelligent”. The thought process seems to be “I think right-wingers are scary and violent. This guy is scary and violent. Therefore he must have been part of (or at least influenced by) the right-wing.” It’s not based in fact, it’s based in ideological prejudice.

    @Chally – I wasn’t referring to you specifically, as far as motives are concerned, and from your other writing here I have no doubt you were sincere in the offense you took. The point I was trying to make is that the use of the term “blood libel” here is specific; they aren’t just throwing it around because it sounds bad. People aren’t just “criticizing” Palin (and Beck, and Limbaugh). They’re accusing them of murder. It’s using a tragic event to paint ideological opponents as monsters, to influence the public to associate conservatives with violence and slaughter. That is why the analogy to the traditional blood libel is there.

    Honestly, do you folks really believe that the political tone is more violent now than it was during the Bush administration? Really? Are you sure this isn’t just cultural revulsion?

  12. Henry: @Chally – I wasn’t referring to you specifically, as far as motives are concerned, and from your other writing here I have no doubt you were sincere in the offense you took. The point I was trying to make is that the use of the term “blood libel” here is specific; they aren’t just throwing it around because it sounds bad. People aren’t just “criticizing” Palin (and Beck, and Limbaugh). They’re accusing them of murder. It’s using a tragic event to paint ideological opponents as monsters, to influence the public to associate conservatives with violence and slaughter. That is why the analogy to the traditional blood libel is there.

    1. No one here is accusing Palin (or Limbaugh or Beck or any other right-wing gasbag) of murder. Indeed, I challenge you to produce a quote accusing Palin et al of such a crime. I personally feel that Palin et al are creating a climate of violence, hatred, and fear that others, such as Loughner, use to justify their own violent actions. Accusing right-wingers of creating an environment that breeds violence is not the same as accusing them of murder.

    2. I was born and raised Jewish and was accused of the blood libel. All four of my grandparents fled Russia at the turn of the 20th century because of ongoing pogroms that were stoked by the blood libel. One of my great-grandfathers was shot in the stomach during such a pogrom. And I’m telling you, dude, that you (and Palin) are way the fuck out of line to appropriate that term to score your own political points. There’s a *big fucking difference* between critiquing the right for their inflammatory, racist, misogynist language and tactics and accusing them of murdering Democrats and using the blood to bake fruitcakes or whatevs. So knock it the fuck off.

  14. Henry, no one is innocent. We all have an impact, however small, on the society we live in. I would never accuse Palin, or other public figures using violent rhetoric directly of murder. But they do have an influence, however indirect it might be, on the general tone of politics and how people interact with politics.

    I don’t get the sense you read my last comment. You just seem to be looking for ways to reduce opinions you disagree with down to simplistic, partisan-driven narratives. Some might be, but I don’t get the sense you read a damned thing I wrote.

    I’m not a partisan on this issue. I spent parts of the second Bush Administration having lengthy conversations with friends and family about how using hateful rhetoric against the President and those working around him was just adding to collective misery. The nasty, violent tone in American politics has been on the rise for awhile now. And it’s foolish to assume it doesn’t impact us all. Just because a public figure like Sarah Palin (or Keith Olbermann or John Kerry for that matter) can’t be accused legally of aiding or committing the actual crime in question doesn’t mean her words and actions, which are followed by millions of people daily, are somehow immune from ethical considerations.

    Using violent metaphors and nasty personal attacks as the basis of speaking about the opposition’s political policies is unethical, end of story. If we spent more time talking about that, and less time trying to exonerate people who are listened to (and even worshiped) by millions, maybe there would be less violence, hatred, and partisan gridlock in this country.

    Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences.

  15. i watched part of the video and couldnt get more than a few minutes in because her facial expression totally undermined any condolences she may have had. shortly after some hallmark sympathy, it turned into the sarah victim show. the clenched jaw, the pursed lips. it was like she was mentally saying “ef you, a-holes!” the entire time.

  16. p.s. At least Olbermann had the sense to apologize for one of his violent-infused contributions to the political climate. Maybe he did it to show up his political opponents, but at least it’s out there in the public that a nationally recognized and followed pundit recognizes his words have an impact.

  17. I wish everyone, especially the mass media, would drop it already. Just quit it, please. If there is any iota of decency in you, change the goddamn subject.

    This reminds me of when the space shuttle Challenger exploded, and they kept showing it over and over and over again on TV. Even as a child, I could tell they were using the tape as a neon sign for their news program.

  18. Marksman, That’s what Americans are great at. Changing the subject whenever things get uncomfortable. So, don’t worry. Most people will move back to American Idol, the NFL playoffs, or their favorite online video game soon enough.

  20. nathan:
    p.s. At least Olbermann had the sense to apologize for one of his violent-infused contributions to the political climate. Maybe he did it to show up his political opponents, but at least it’s out there in the public that a nationally recognized and followed pundit recognizes his words have an impact.  

    My respect for Olbermann, which has recently tanked quite a bit from his increasingly erratic newscasts, has been somewhat restored.

    Maybe I can add him back to my list of political contributors, which currently only has Fareed Zakaria, Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.

  21. Wow…using the phrase “blood libel” is SO inappropriate and offensive, especially given that Rep. Giffords is Jewish.

    Yeah, a Jewish woman gets shot in the head by a guy who loves Mein Kampf? Definitely a good time for Christians to complain about all the murderous antisemitism directed at… uh… themselves.

    Wut.

  22. There are other ways of saying someone is falsely accusing you of abetting murder than using the exact two words “blood libel.” Like saying “I am being falsely accused of abetting murder.” I pin this down to ignorance.

    As for Palin it doesn’t matter, her name is now synonymous with the victim card, not just because of her but also because of her supporters. The only time she ever comes out on top in a news cycle is when she is playing the victim card, that is why her otherwise irredeemably pathetic deck is loaded with them. And it is something we liberals should really keep in mind.

  23. Every time I hear about Joe Wilson yelling you lie, I imagine him screaming it in an absurdly loud and obnoxious way. Like, if Invader Zim were yelling, “YOUUUUU LIEEEEEEEEE!”

  24. Henry: “You have blood on your hands” is not “criticism”. How would you prefer people refer to blaming someone for the death of innocents without evidence? Blood libel seems rather apt. And its not like this is the first time the term has been used in this context.People who immediately look to blame their ideological opponents when something tragic happens are assholes, end of story. That’s true if you blame homosexuals and feminists for 9/11, and it’s true here. For the record, I could give a shit about Sarah Palin, but this isn’t just about her.  

    Jews were slaughtered en masse for centuries because of their “blood libel”. Palin just has to put up with a few more angry tweets this week than usual. For God’s sake, her entire video about the shooting was about “Boo hoo, poor me, people are being mean to me”. She had no words for the families of the injured or dead, not even the little girl. She is a disgraceful woman.

Comments are currently closed.