From the moment John McCain unveiled her as his choice of running mate in 2008, Sarah Palin has become a hate-figure to vast swathes - and all evidence points to - a significant majority, of the Left. Her very existence inarguably sends liberals, from the tonier and sophisticated precincts where New York Times journalists congregate to the scatological feverswamps of the DailyKos, into paroxysms of near-homicidal rage. They don't just hate her, they hate her husband (who has been accused of impregnating his own daughter), her children, her parents and any and all of her associates and supporters.
Frankly, it is beyond question that the vast overwhelming majority of liberals wish the woman had never been born, and, to be even more candid, it is also inarguable that should there be an incident, whether accidental or deliberate, where the lady were to lose her life, there would be celebrating and glasses raised in toasts to whatever (or whoever) brought it about from the comments sections of the Huffington Post to the newsrooms of MSNBC.
Which brings us to the recent tragic incident in Tucson where an obviously crazed Jared Lee Loughner opened fire on a constituent event with Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, shooting her in the head and outright killing a Federal Judge and others, including a 9 year old girl.
Despite there being no evidence that this incident involved politics in any way as opposed to an obviously mentally disturbed individual, or that if it involved politics, that Jared Loughner was in any way affiliated with Right, and specifically that he was influenced in any way by the writings and speeches of Sarah Palin, liberal journalists and columnists in the nation's most prestigious newspapers, celebrities and liberal bloggers did not wait for Giffords to finish being stabilized before pointing the finger of blame squarely at Sarah Palin and her "rhetoric". This even while most of them are acknowledging that this may have nothing to do with politics and that there is no evidence that Jared Loughner had ever given Sarah Palin a second thought.
In fact, the evidence is that this was a personal attack based on what Loughner must obviously have considered a personal sleight. According to Loughner's friend from high school, he had personally met with Congresswoman Giffords in 2007 (well before Sarah Palin was a household name) with questions reflecting his rather warped political views (seemingly influenced by both the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf) and had come away unhappy with the encounter. Considering that mentally disturbed individuals tend to become obsessed and focus on perceived sleights and grow them to monumental proportions, this is most likely what prompted what happened in Tucson.
But from Paul Krugman of the New York Times drawing a direct causal link between Sarah Palin's innocuous graphic targeting vulnerable Democrats (including Giffords) to defeat at the polls and the shooting, to Michael Daly of the NY Daily News asserting in his article headline that "Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' blood Is On Sarah Palin's Hands ..." to Markos Moulitsas' obviously gleeful "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin" tweet, and Wolf Blitzer giving serious air time on CNN to the idea that the attack on Gabrielle Giffords was as a direct result of Sarah Palin's rhetoric in opposition to the Obama agenda, there seems to be a concerted effort in the "mainstream" media to try and convict Sarah Palin of Jared Loughner's actions.
Already, in the comments sections of the New York Times, New York Daily News and numerous other "mainstream" newsmedia outlets' websites, liberal commenters are calling for Sarah Palin's arrest and the seizure of her assets. Others are darkly hinting that she should be made to "suffer" the same fate as Rep. Giffords - for which they hold Palin responsible - with not much condemnation from other liberal commenters.
Which is what leads me to believe that this isn't the typical liberal leap to reap a political benefit from others' personal tragedy, but using the same logic as used by Markos Moulitsas, Paul Krugman, Michael Daly et al. an attempt to pre-justify an attack on the lives of Sarah Palin and members of her family. According to liberal journalists and bloggers, Sarah Palin - via her uniquely incendiary murder-inducing rhetoric - is personally responsible for Jared Loughner's attack on Rep. Giffords.
Well then, what could be more incendiary than asserting that one is directly responsible for the death of a 9 year old girl, the death of a Federal Judge and the shooting of a Congresswoman in the head? By their own logic, this would certainly lead to an individual - convinced by Daly, Moulitsas et al that Sarah Palin has gotten away with murder - purchasing a gun, leveling it at Sarah Palin, perhaps when she's at a book signing, or lounging at the pool with her husband and children, and opening fire.
I would certainly hope that this is not what Michael Daly, Markos Moulitsas, Paul Krugman, Jane Fonda, etc. are hoping for deep down. But given their own presumably sincere belief that "reckless" political speech leads to violence, and given the unseemly speed with which they have recklessly decided to heap responsibility on Sarah Palin with no facts to back them up and many to count against them, I am forced to conclude that they are, at best, neutral, and at worst, desirous of Sarah Palin being subjected to serious (even fatal) bodily harm.