Sarah Palin: Tucson Shootings Video and Transcript

Today Sarah Palin has responded to the Tucson shootings, and the heated criticism of her “target” map, similarly used by the DNC. You can see the pain in her face, courtesy of Liberal Democrats who blame her for an act that percolated in the mind of Jared Loughner some three years before the political target map was released. One thing we know, had the “target” map using the surveyors mark, not a rifle sight, never been used, Sarah would have been targeted for the term “Mama Grizzlie,” as being aggressive, as she was this morning with a Democrat operative interviewing with Martha McCallum. Transcript and video below.

Sarah Palin

Video Transcript:

Like millions of Americans I learned of the tragic events in Arizona on Saturday, and my heart broke for the innocent victims. No words can fill the hole left by the death of an innocent, but we do mourn for the victims’ families as we express our sympathy.

I agree with the sentiments shared yesterday at the beautiful Catholic mass held in honor of the victims. The mass will hopefully help begin a healing process for the families touched by this tragedy and for our country.

Our exceptional nation, so vibrant with ideas and the passionate exchange and debate of ideas, is a light to the rest of the world. Congresswoman Giffords and her constituents were exercising their right to exchange ideas that day, to celebrate our Republic’s core values and peacefully assemble to petition our government. It’s inexcusable and incomprehensible why a single evil man took the lives of peaceful citizens that day.

There is a bittersweet irony that the strength of the American spirit shines brightest in times of tragedy. We saw that in Arizona. We saw the tenacity of those clinging to life, the compassion of those who kept the victims alive, and the heroism of those who overpowered a deranged gunman.

Like many, I’ve spent the past few days reflecting on what happened and praying for guidance. After this shocking tragedy, I listened at first puzzled, then with concern, and now with sadness, to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event.

President Reagan said, “We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election.

The last election was all about taking responsibility for our country’s future. President Obama and I may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming the health of our democratic process. Two years ago his party was victorious. Last November, the other party won. In both elections the will of the American people was heard, and the peaceful transition of power proved yet again the enduring strength of our Republic.

Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.

There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those “calm days” when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren’t designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders’ genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure.

As I said while campaigning for others last March in Arizona during a very heated primary race, “We know violence isn’t the answer. When we ‘take up our arms’, we’re talking about our vote.” Yes, our debates are full of passion, but we settle our political differences respectfully at the ballot box – as we did just two months ago, and as our Republic enables us to do again in the next election, and the next. That’s who we are as Americans and how we were meant to be. Public discourse and debate isn’t a sign of crisis, but of our enduring strength. It is part of why America is exceptional.

No one should be deterred from speaking up and speaking out in peaceful dissent, and we certainly must not be deterred by those who embrace evil and call it good. And we will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant of differing opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults.

Just days before she was shot, Congresswoman Giffords read the First Amendment on the floor of the House. It was a beautiful moment and more than simply “symbolic,” as some claim, to have the Constitution read by our Congress. I am confident she knew that reading our sacred charter of liberty was more than just “symbolic.” But less than a week after Congresswoman Giffords reaffirmed our protected freedoms, another member of Congress announced that he would propose a law that would criminalize speech he found offensive.

It is in the hour when our values are challenged that we must remain resolved to protect those values. Recall how the events of 9-11 challenged our values and we had to fight the tendency to trade our freedoms for perceived security. And so it is today.

Let us honor those precious lives cut short in Tucson by praying for them and their families and by cherishing their memories. Let us pray for the full recovery of the wounded. And let us pray for our country. In times like this we need God’s guidance and the peace He provides. We need strength to not let the random acts of a criminal turn us against ourselves, or weaken our solid foundation, or provide a pretext to stifle debate.

America must be stronger than the evil we saw displayed last week. We are better than the mindless finger-pointing we endured in the wake of the tragedy. We will come out of this stronger and more united in our desire to peacefully engage in the great debates of our time, to respectfully embrace our differences in a positive manner, and to unite in the knowledge that, though our ideas may be different, we must all strive for a better future for our country. May God bless America.

Many thanks to David Lemon for the transcript.

Sarah Palin Tucson Shooting Video and Transcript (video)

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Sarah Palin: Tucson Shootings Video and Transcript | Maggie's Notebook --

  • How come nobody is asking if leftist psychopath Loughner wasn’t inspired by Obama’s calls to “bring a gun”, “get up in their faces”, and “punish our enemies”? THAT would seem to me a more likely inspiration for a guy whose favorite books are Mein Kaumpf and the Communist Manifesto than anything we’ve heard from Rush, Sarah, or Glenn!

    • Jaybee

      Why do you omit Ayn Rand from your list of his reading material.

    • Jaybee

      Why do you omit Ayn Rand from your list of his reading material?

      • What difference does it make Jaybee? Have you read Ayn Rand? There was no violence, there was only the people trying to break free from totalitarian government/oppressors (although there was some violence by the oppressors/totalitarian government)

        Industry was broken. The people had no control. What does Ayn Rand have to do with Jared Loughner or what he did?

        • Jaybee

          The difference is that Zilla was stating that the crazed killer was a “leftist” but conveniently omitting Rand from the reading list. By the same token I could omit Marx and call Loughner a “rightist”. However, I did not do that.

    • Zilla, the “aggressive speech” if we must insist on calling it that, is well documented from this president.

      Our House leadership better be capable of backing down these new laws and resolutions.

  • Thanks Maggie for posting Sarah Palin’s response to the accusations against her and 3 or 4 others. I’m glad she quoted President Reagan’s wisdom which truly fits this situation and may God continue to bless America with leaders like Sarah.

    • Hi Carl, Palin knows how to make a case. I thought her words were inspiring, and got right to the bottom line: no one is guilty but Jared Loughner. She avoided blaming the sheriff who could have made a difference, perhaps. Very big of her. The sheriff deserves some grief.

  • Pingback: Scumbag Style » Cue The Violins()

  • Mark De Monbrun

    How sad. Sarah Palin’s comments are unbelievable. Rather than accepting responsibility for her part in the heightened rhetoric, she shifts the blame just as “Zilla” did in a preceding comment. While she is indeed not the only one to use violent metaphors in today’s political climate, the least she (and others from both sides of the aisle) could do is accept and yes, even apologize for her/their part in it. Just sad.

    • Mark De Monbrun, why not answer Zilla? The fact is, was no one’s fault but Loughner.

      Targeting our politcal opponents is what makes America what it is. The people decide who to elect. We talk a lot about it before election day. What a sad, pitiful leftist you must be to believe anyone besides Loughner is to blame for this atrocity.

      Once again, why not answer Zilla?

  • Thanks for printing the transcript, Dame Maggie.

    Quoted from and Linked to at:
    Of Rabid Dogs, Wimpy Snakes In The Grass, And A Classy Dame

  • Ran

    Thanks Liberty Belle! She’s scooped the Teleprompter with an honestly Presidential tone…

  • She looked very Presidential.

  • Something very fishy about all this- not sure we all know the whole story as usual. Too much blame game going on by the left. What are they covering up?

  • Mark De Monbrun

    Maggie…..I thought I did when I mentioned both sides of the aisle. My personal opinion is that violent rhetoric does indeed have a bearing on violent behavior, and/or assasinations and/or attemps by those of us with (or without) mental conditions. Link directly to Mrs. Palin? Of course not. But I do think there is an indirect link between violent behavior and violent rhetoric.

    Case in point would be one Dr. George Tiller who was murdered by a right-wing pro-life fanatic following a huge amount of violent rhetoric by pro-life activist. The violent rhetoric preceeding his murder is well documented. The number of doctors and nurses murdered over the years in the name of the pro-life movement is huge. So again, I do think there is a connection between violent rhetoric and violent behavior.

    To quote Dr. Warren Hern, a friend of Dr Tiller…“Dr. Tiller is dead by an anti-abortion assassin, and this is the absolutely inevitable consequence of 35 years of anti-abortion fanatic rhetoric and intimidation and assassination violence and exploitation by the Republican Party of this movement.”

    The President called on all of us to lighten up. Point is that in my opinion, terms related to war and/or violence have no place in American politics. As President Obama said at the memorial,(paraphrased) let us all try to live up to the childlike expectations for our country of 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green.

    And to quote John McCain from an op-ed piece to be published this coming Sunday in The Washington Post…..”The president appropriately disputed the injurious suggestion that some participants in our political debates were responsible for a depraved man’s inhumanity. He asked us all to conduct ourselves in those debates in a manner that would not disillusion an innocent child’s hopeful patriotism. I agree wholeheartedly with these sentiments. We should respect the sincerity of the convictions that enliven our debates.”


  • Pingback: Sunday Hunt For Links – Great Horned Owl Edition | Political Realities()

  • Pingback: Sarah Palin | Trends Pics()