Get PJ Media on your Apple

Ed Driscoll

Sarah Palin’s Shocking Eliminationist Rhetoric

September 28th, 2013 - 3:01 pm

“SARAH PALIN CONTROVERSY: Rips Opponents as Terrorists and Hostage-Taking Anarchists Using Homophobic Rhetoric,” as spotted by Doug Ross:

Did I say Sarah Palin?

My mistake.

I meant Democrat politicians and power-brokers who resort to the most disgusting rhetoric imaginable.

• White House Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer likened Republicans to suicide-bombers, saying the White House would not be “negotiating with people with a bomb strapped to their chest.”

• Pfeiffer also said that the House, in exercising its Constitutional duty known as “the power of the purse”, was acting like a pack of arsonists threatening to “burn it [the nation] down.”

• President Barack Obama accused the GOP of political “blackmail”, implying that they are kidnappers holding the nation hostage.

There are more examples at his blog, on what is obviously the current DNC/Journolist phrase du jour. “Gabbi Giffords, of course, immediately spoke out against this sort of extreme, divisive rhetoric,” Doug quips. “Oh, wait: no, she didn’t.”

No, of course not. Why, it’s as if all of that “new civility” rhetoric from the left in early 2011 was merely an expedient cudgel to score cheap points by beating up on then-newly-resurgent Republicans.

By the way, Doug has a new ebook out, a crime drama that’s available for the Kindle, that fans of that genre might want to check out.

Related: Curiously, the White House would rather talk to real terrorists, than fellow politicians whom they slander with their guttersnipe eliminationist rhetoric. “CNN: Obama’s Been on Phone More With Iran than Speaker of the House:”

“Obviously, clearly, today, President Obama has been on the phone more with the leader of Iran than he was with the speaker of the House,” CNN senior White House correspondent Brianna Keilar, “as far as we know. I think here at the White House, and I haven’t posed the question exactly to this way, Jake, but I think they would say that at this point they may actually see more promise — or certainly, I think, a potential reward — to talking to Iran at this point.”

And we know that historically, CNN would much rather talk with terrorists themselves, than to Republicans.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (3)
All Comments   (3)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
"And we know that historically, CNN would much rather talk with terrorists themselves, than to Republicans."

On the other hand, most people would rather watch Iranians than CNN.

51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
You omitted the homophobic bit. Was someone noshing Barilla at Chick-fil-A?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All