No Sarah, Democrats did NOT use the same kind of political map as you did.

[mzmolly]

*DLC - bullseye/target symbol map


Palin's - personalized, gunsight symbol map


Target stores - trademark bullseye symbol


When I see Palin's, personalized, gun specific crosshair symbol, I think about firing a gun. When I see the *DLC, bullseye map above, I think about a friendly game of darts or shopping at the local Target store.

Plainly put, there is a difference between a bullseye and crosshairs. Especially when the (crosshair) symbolism in question, is coupled with reload, armed and dangerous, second amendment remedy rhetoric.

....................................................................................................................................

Palin referred to her map symbol as a "bullseye" some time ago, in order to push back against critics. However, after the tragedy in Arizona, a Palin staffer suggested it was a surveyor symbol. Neither assertion is credible, IMO. Palin used a crosshair symbol and left her controversial map online, long after Gabby Giffords expressed concern about this issue. Sadly, (to my understanding) Palin did not take down her map, until Gabby Giffords took a bullet to the head, and others lay dead and/or wounded in Arizona.



*The DLC is a special interest, business oriented group. They do not represent the Democratic party.

[DJ13]

1. Dems targeted regions, Palin put her gun sights on people

[tomhaverford]

2. Irrelevant

Why is the debate even about lame gun metaphors in the first place? This type of language is used every day in sports, business, and any other thing that has two competing sides. As usual, liberals failed to use the moment to highlight ACTUAL AND DIRECT THREATS OF VIOLENCE that there is plenty of on the right. Using stupid arguments like "Palin had the crosshairs" just gave the right all the ammunition (see?) to play the victim. Why is no one talking about the things on that CSGV list or the fact that the reason we have gun metaphors in every day language in the first place is because the right has fetishized gun culture for decades!

[mzmolly]

5. No it's not. Congresswoman Giffords stated she felt threatened

by this kind of symbolism. She was right to feel this way.

[Angry Dragon]

7. Then maybe we need to change the words we use everyday

We need to crush them, push their faces in, we need to go out and just kill them, massacre them, we can not let any one left standing.
----Just a coach talking to his football team of high school kids----

Words matter, we need to change the words we use.........

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

10. Yes and No - context is everything.

The term 'straight shooter' has a benign meaning taken as someone who speaks their mind.

However, calling someone a Straight Shooter who speaks their mind but pictured with a RIFLE pointing at you.. or bullet holes around the words...

takes on an entirely different 'metaphor'.

It's NOT the words.

It's the CONTEXT they're used in.

[mzmolly]

11. PS - What does second amendment remedies

mean to you?

That's not a sports metaphor, that's a kill metaphor.

[Vattel]

14. nailed it! (oops, was that too violent?)

[woo me with science]

23. Naw, darts and nail guns are just fine.

Try to keep up with the rules!

[malaise]

18. Epic Fail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8P1ff9naCI

Watch and learn

[Cheap_Trick]

3. Now, if someone had shot Colorado

then they'd have something.

[mzmolly]

12. I tossed a dart in the general direction.

Does that count?

[woo me with science]

25. Oh boy! I'm taking darts to my next political rally,

since that's obviously okay!:sarcasm:

[mzmolly]

33. I was shocked to learn that the second amendment is about voting rights.

I'll be armed with ballots! ;)

[RSillsbee]

15. Mommy's all right

Daddy's all right

They just seem a little weird

[blondeatlast]

40. Zing-->target.

Couldn't resist, sorry!

[EFerrari]

4. She used cross-hairs and individual names. She made it personal.

The right wing is clueless about relationships and social gestures but no one is that clueless.

[mzmolly]

6. Absolutely.

Another important point. I've edited my OP in response to your post.

[molly77]

41. The right wing is also a very bullying mentality

and don't bother to be truthful. State of politics in the US. Neither side is truthful.But the right promotes violence.

[notadmblnd]

8. Totally different.

No politicians are named and no one is being encouraged to take any sort of stand. The ad is making it clear that democrats are targeting regions, not asking people to take action.

But do you think the MSM will point that out to any of these fools- who are working overtime trying to come up with something close to the behavior they engage in?

[mzmolly]

9. Nope. They'll

feel it's too much nuance for the American people to understand.

[Obamanaut]

17. Names are mentioned here, along with the word 'targeted' ->

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/23/dems-target-12-republican_n_169113.html

We can find the words “The House Republicans targeted are…” and a list of names.

[LeftishBrit]

20. But not with a picture of a gun or gunsights

'Targeted' is not in itself usually used in a violent way: groups are targeted by businesses for marketing; governments constantly set 'targets'.But the additional imagery in Palin's post makes it more violent in its associations.

[Obamanaut]

24. Quite true, but individual names were used here, not seats, groups,

districts, or anything else, just individual names.

Maps with bullseye type targets, targeted individuals, 'behind enemy lines' - similarities exist here, but they are being glossed over, IMO, because 'these are our maps, and that's not what we meant.'

We do the same thing with words we don't like. We can use a w*rd if we replace some of the letters with asterisks, but if we use all the letters it is deemed offensive. Inasmuch as the reader knows what the w*rd really is, why is that less offensive.

Both sides are guilty of this sort of behavior, and both sides really should start cleaning up some of the rhetoric.

[mzmolly]

35. Second amendment remedies, reload, crosshairs

are gun specific. Target implies a game of darts. And, "Behind enemy lines" wasn't directed toward a group that carries missile launchers on their belt to political rallies.

Both sides are not just as guilty.

[notadmblnd]

30. 'kay, but there are no graphics suggesting violence and no call for individuals to take action

so what was your point?

[W_HAMILTON]

32. That's quite a leap

The map and what you posted have nothing to do with each other. I believe they were used in different years. Trying to compare these two with what Palin did is reaching. And, no, it's not just because I am biased towards Democrats. They really aren't at all similar.

[mzmolly]

34. I used to shop atTarget. "Target" does not generally, specifically imply shooting a gun.

eom

[tavalon]

13. DLC are bastards

and you sort of ruined your point. Behind enemy lines?

Actually, the DLC are the enemy of Democrats and they've managed to completely infiltrate our too big tent.

[RSillsbee]

16. I'm not comfortable

W/ the "behind enemy lines " thing either

[mzmolly]

37. I'm not comfortable with it myself. But it's not equal to

continued, gun specific rhetoric being directed at people who are "armed and dangerous" at political rallies.

[Buzz Clik]

22. Obsess much?

[mzmolly]

36. Tell me, what does behind enemy lines mean to a group of liberals who look at a map of the US?

As I've said before, liberals are not carrying military weapons on their belts to political rallies, with the names of individuals to put in their cross-hairs.

[woo me with science]

19. ...

[Buzz Clik]

21. It's the same concept, but Palin's context is what separates the two.

A target and a gun sight invoke the same metaphor: we are gunning for you, we are targeting you, we will take you out.

When the metaphor ends (as did the DLC map) with nothing beyond benign "targeting", it's harmless. When the map is accompanied by speech that enhances the metaphor of violence, it is not harmless.

[mzmolly]

38. The concept is hitting a target. The difference is between whether the target is a bullseye

or zeroing in on a gun target.

I agree with your other points.

[66 dmhlt]

26. Barbara Walters & Tom Brokaw have been defending Palin

All week with this sort of false equivalency crap.

Brokaw doing it doesn't surprise me, but Walters did.

[LiberalFighter]

28. Walters isn't that bright especially with politics.

[LiberalFighter]

27. The legend presented for the DLC map indicated margin Bush won

AND the map was for Presidential election. The bulls-eyes can't in this instance to be used to indicate taking someone out by drastic means just in those states with the bulls-eye because he was a candidate in all 50 states. And the legend described the status of each state (50 states) while Palin's map focused entirely on 20 in 12 states.

If I was going to create a map targeting individuals for defeat I would more than likely use numbers 1-20 or the Congressional District numbers on the map.

[mzmolly]

31. Great points.

:hi:

[justiceischeap]

29. If Loughner had used darts to make his statement, this DLC map would be a valid

talking point for the right. What makes Palin's map so heinous is several factors. One, as others have pointed out, she "targeted" specific individuals. Second, Giffords actually spoke of the consequences from the map and the rhetoric from the right (before it became a national issue last weekend). Finally, the folks in Tucson were shot witha gun. As I said in the subject line, if he had used darts to harm people (no one likely would be dead) then the DLC map would be a valid discussion.

I'm a designer and know better than anyone, imagery is specifically used to convey meaning, hidden or blatant. You can sit in meetings for hours and talk about the feelings certain images might invoke by the audience meant to see an ad, design, website, etc. and how said image might make people act. Again, when I see the DLC ad, I want to go to a pub, have a beer and a game of darts.

[mzmolly]

39. Well said. Subtle differences,

make a difference.