Skip to content

USA Still "a Light to the Rest of the World"?

Sarah Palin responds with an 8-minute video statement to the criticism that has been leveled at her after the Arizona shooting. She claims:

Our exceptional nation, so vibrant with ideas and the passionate exchange and debate of ideas, is a light to the rest of the world.

Is the US still a light to "the rest of the world" or is that just arrogant and self-congratulatory wishful thinking?

Comedian Lewis Black addressed this boasting of American exceptionalism/superiority/etc. in 2008.


Related post on Atlantic Review:
Arizona Shooting Victim Was a 9/11 Baby

Endnote: Interesting statistic quoted in the Washington Post:

According to the Brady Campaign, an advocacy group, "more Americans were killed with guns in the 18-year period between 1979 and 1997 (651,697) than were killed in battle in all wars since 1775 (650,858)."

Fellow citizens are a bigger threat to Americans than the world is? Okay, not really comparable, but still interesting.

Antibürokratieteam presents NY Times bias.

Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as Linear | Threaded

David on :

In the video Sarah Palin accuses her critics of 'blood libel'. The most charitable interpretation is that the woman is simply ignorant and followed some bad advice from her handlers in using that emotionally-laden phrase The only positive aspect of her Facebook appearance is that any presidential ambitions are now permanently dashed, Compare this video with President Obama's eloquent and moving address at the memorial service last evening.

Joe Noory on :

If accusing Sarah Palin of some responsibility for those murders, despite any real or evident facts is NOT Blood Libel, then WHAT IS? It's quite plain, despite what you want it to seem to be. Stop pretending to be charitable. Your very first thought was to employ those murders for self-bolstering criticism of your political opponents and little else. Your hope that her political future is dashed is a rather obvious demonstration of that. It's quite plain, despite what you want it to seem to be. Are you now going to accuse her of "inserting herself into the issue"? The difference between Palin's response and Obama's convocation was that Obama was at a convocation: he let his political supporters such as yourself accuse others of a blood libel. Loughner was a 9-11 Truther, an anti-semite, against others' religious faith, and was obsessed with government-related conspiracies. His "inspirations" are far more likely to be the movements employed by the political left against George Bush. In short, Loughner can be called the far-left and revolutionary-left's creation, if anything. I will not charitably call you ignorant. I will, uncharitably call you an ethically bereft opportunist for buying into the use of that shooting for the advancement of your political views.

Marie Claude on :

er you're obsessed by the left, some aware chronkikers would rather find a influence from the Alex Jones shows

Joe Noory on :

Why don't you, for just one second, recognize the fact that comment no. 1 from David had NOTHING to do with the blog post - because his determined personal ideological hatred of his fellow citizens was more important than anything else. Oh, and Joerg, if we aren't "exceptional" what is this "rest of the world" in [i]passive-aggressive scare quotes[/i] crap? You can't have both. Is whatever dimness your neighbors have to offer any sort of alternative to it? I didn't think so, because people are rarely admired by arms peddlers who don't do anything about the human rights violations that they bang on about. Have they actually done anything worthy of congratulation or self-congratulation? Hell no. So take whatever proof you can find from a 2 year old comedy routine, or an irrelevant rally organized by Jon Stewart last year, if that's what you need, but don't expect to move any souls or make any friends.

David on :

Such anger and hate. Get a grip, man. Nearly every serious commentator in US - both conservative and liberal - has been highly critical of Palin for her remarks.

Joe Noory on :

Really? Just who are "all the kids" that you're talking about? "All" the critics and commentators in the entire universe of Gutmenchlichkeit that you find appealing? I certainly doubt it. Tell me one thing: if accusing someone for responsibilty for murder due to some tmospheric contribution isn't blood libel, then what is? That accusation, and your Dr. Strangelove-like reflex to megaphone it without thinking reveals a vile, hateful motive, and a poor grounding in reality. I think I have a pretty good grip. My first thought, unlike yours' wasn't to exploit the violent act of a disturbed man for political masturbation. You own anyone you pulled that vulgar stunt stunt on an apology.

Pat Patterson on :

So Dershowitz, Krauthammer and others are not serious because they didn't condemn Sarah Palin? Most that I've read seem torn between not have rallies with t-shirts in Tucson and not saying anything at all. But considering how many pundits are ranting about incivility and gun control when an obviously deranged leftsit kills a moderate Democrat and then blames conservatives seems to cry out for some kind of reponse. It's akin to a Democrat or liberal claiming that the Republicans are racist then when the Republican says they are not the final response is why are you injecting yourself into this groups cry along fest?

Pat Patterson on :

Is "blood libel" now on the list of words or phrases that one particular group owns? So far, aside from the usual outliers, no one else even really cares because they are more concerned with the victims then what some politician or blogger said. But then some people will always react in seemingly measured hysteria and ignore that beam.

Marie Claude on :

uh, that's why Sarah is watching Siberia through her window, thanks to the light of America ! Well America isn't the only country afflicted by such medias addicted femals, take our Segolène vs Sarah, both have the warmonggering spirit, the first within our society traditionnal behaviour, the second ala American style

Joe Noory on :

You're quoting Saturday Night Live's Tina Fey, not Sarah Palin, you dope. What's curious is what Europe, by way of it's criticising population resembles: a people who would extinguish any light they could find, at any turn, for the sake of some fake attempt to make a cynical pose look like intelligence - and to do it for the sake of their relative lack of achievement in anything significant in the world. Freed anyone from a murderous dictator lately? They you certainly can't claim that Europe is a light to anyone other than those who see it as their third or fourth choice of places to be a refugee.

Marie Claude on :

dope yourself Jonouri ! need a european nonos to make your life worthier ?

Pat Patterson on :

The Brady group, or bunch, is fudging by using 1979 as the cutoff date because before that date homicide by firearms was anywhere from two to three times higher than the period they cited. What happened in 1979? There was a huge drop off attributed mostly to two things; the rise in the legality of concealed weapons and the utter failure of the 'assault weapons' ban and second in the reinstitution of the death penalty. We also have more people dying of car accidents and heart disease now then prior to 1979 but then what does that have to do with gun violence? Should we ban cars and french fries? http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html#guns BTW, the guys that wrote Freakonomics also claimed the crime and homicide rate went down because the birth rate had fallen in the 70's due Roe v Wade. But most gun control people really don't want to emphasize that.

Marie Claude on :

"Should we ban cars and french fries?" french cars are only priced as collection cars by your standards french fried had only the name removed for freedom fried BTW, french fried should be labelled "Belgian fried" cuz it's where they were created

Pat Patterson on :

What did that have to do with my comment? Collection cars, what the heck does that mean in the real world?

Marie Claude on :

uh then why did you quote french cars and frieds ? Hmm, aren't you the one that said that he had a old DS ?

Pat Patterson on :

You could have checked the comment before answering as I wrote, "Should we ban cars and french fries?" A little hypersensitive today?

Marie Claude on :

no, just that I purposely don't read all what you write with your meaning intention, if you write on a public board, we are entitled to focus on what words are significating for themselves, ie wittgenstein

Pat Patterson on :

Then please show me where I mentioned French cars at all? Wouldn't Wittgenstein have cautioned against responding to any argument without at least understanding what was said? I think you need to reread his Philosophical Investigations before simply making stuff up.

Marie Claude on :

you can't simply bear that you aren't always right, a teacher professional deformation ! cher professor Zebulon, Wittgenstein stated that we should use words as a mere for their concrete sense Suffer that I can play with words, as I don't care of your opinion

Pat Patterson on :

Then why is so had for you to admit that you pulled the French cars out of thin air? Why is it so hard for you to admit you responded to some imaginary insult and then stumbled off trumpeting through the prarie sounding an alarm? This has nothing to do with being right or wrong, since you didn't even address what as said, merely hyperventilating over...nothing!

Marie Claude on :

I perfectly understood your sentence context, just that I like to titillate your self assurance

Pat Patterson on :

I doubt that other wise you wouldn't have started in on French cars or Belgian fries but tried to at least address the subject of my comment. I suspect that you wear rear view mirrors from trying to back away from these nonsensical responses without also stepping the in piles of Parisian dog poo.

Marie Claude on :

boff you're a bad player

Joe Noory on :

Marie Claude: The reference was to the nanny state protecting us from all harm. i.e.: fired foods and automobiles. Only YOU think that it is directed to you, because you're a self-absorbed narcissist who shows signs of having Borderline Personality Disorder.

ROA on :

I didn’t see the program, but Mike Petroulas at Andrew Breitbart’s site is giving credit to Jon Stewart because” Stewart did place the blame — on the deranged shooter himself, exactly where it should be.” If Mike’s statement is true Joerg is going to be seriously conflicted. Does he agree with his idol Stewart or indulge his hatred for Palin? This conflict may require months of frequent therapy or massive doses of antidepressants to resolve, if that is even possible. http://bigjournalism.com/mikemetroulas/2011/01/14/credit-where-its-due-jon-stewarts-voice-of-reason/

Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

Form options