Palin Event Cancelled for Safety Reasons

guyser · February 8, 2011

However, cancelling an appearance because of security concerns isn't one of them. Stop the derangement already.

What security concerns?

If you want to talk about insecurity concerns, she has many.

BubberMiley · February 8, 2011

Stop the derangement already.

What derangement? I've said many times I like Sarah Palin. It's sad that you can't come up with a real argument and keep relying on this old, lame "derangement syndrome" theme.

Especially since if anyone on this board has a "derangement syndrome", it's you. :lol:

But I see you still haven't addressed why you think Palin's rhetoric could not possibly be hurtful, but anyone's rhetoric against her is a "security concern."

But you've always been comfortable exhibiting total hypocrisy.

punked · February 8, 2011

Yes, it was the DEMOCRATIC leadership council as oppose to the DEMOCRATIC national committee.

Yah that Organization shut down Shady. Just like Palin in a few years.

WIP · February 8, 2011

You mean like Democrats put targets on Republican Senate seats in 2004? Just like that? And you mean like when Obama said "they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." You mean like that? When did the rules change for her as oppose to other politicians?

Oh right, I forgot. Palin Derangement Syndrome. That's why.

Well, since you already had your head handed to you on the Democratic targets point, I'll focus on Obama's mob movie reference:"if they bring a knife, we bring a gun." I'm not an Obama fan or defender, but I remember at the time, he was facing a lot of flak for appearing to be weak and vacilating in the face of aggressive Republican attacks and rhetoric. That statement was made at a fundraiser event that wasn't broadcast for the public also. This is not like the public rallies by Palin, Sharron Angle, Bachman and other loons that advised using guns if they couldn't win the elections....2nd amendment remedies yadayadayada. These are the clowns who bring guns to events, and quote Founding Father's statements calling for violent overthrow of the Government: something about the nation's soil being watered with the blood of enemies and patriots and such.

And if there is Palin Derangement Syndrome, it's probably the dismay that many rational Americans feel after watching a dimwitted programmed, packaged candidate enter the White House, and realizing that the corporate conservative movement has a stock of empty-headed morons like Palin that can be filled with whatever propaganda they put in there. And the fact that these are people with no morals or intellectual curiosity to independently evaluate whatever decisions they would make in office. They would be just like Bush 2.0, ask Cheney or whoever else is talking in their ear to find out what to do or what to say.

WIP · February 8, 2011

Palin’s cancellation because of safety concerns at an event in Colorado was enough to send a Denver Post journalist searching for “the altar of liberal hate” that was denying help to military families and children.

Read more: Littwin: So hateful, even Sarah Palin won't come here? - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_17321890?source=commented-#ixzz1DN6QEyMk

Last year, Sarah Palin stopped right here in Hamilton of all places, and collected an estimated 100K for blathering some short speech written on a teleprompter, and taking three or four questions that were pre-screened by her advisers. I'm still wondering what the hell this is all about! Who are these clowns in my area that have this kind of money and want Sarah Palin?

GostHacked · February 8, 2011

Last year, Sarah Palin stopped right here in Hamilton of all places, and collected an estimated 100K for blathering some short speech written on a teleprompter, and taking three or four questions that were pre-screened by her advisers. I'm still wondering what the hell this is all about! Who are these clowns in my area that have this kind of money and want Sarah Palin?

But that should clue you into something else. The screening of the questions. It's all theater. It's all a ruse. Politics and politicians.

bloodyminded · February 10, 2011

Shady is right, some don't see that they seem to be saying it's okay for Palin to be threatened but not Democrat.

But the linked piece says there were no threats against her.

You're the one who linked it.

Shakeyhands · February 10, 2011

But the linked piece says there were no threats against her.

You're the one who linked it.

BM'd, We should never let facts get in the way of a good partisan rant.

scribblet · February 10, 2011

But the linked piece says there were no threats against her.

You're the one who linked it.

If you look further back you will see that I agreed there were no specific threats, it was cancelled because of security concerns, obviously something you think is funny. I'll bet if it were a liberal/democrat you wouldn't think it so funny. The hypocrisy and double standards on here are amazing.

Bitsy · February 10, 2011

No specific threats; no police reports; no ticket sales….. :lol:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/onslaught-of-personal-attacks-that-forced-cancellation-of-palin-event-police-claim-no-problems/

bloodyminded · February 10, 2011

If you look further back you will see that I agreed there were no specific threats, it was cancelled because of security concerns, obviously something you think is funny. I'll bet if it were a liberal/democrat you wouldn't think it so funny. The hypocrisy and double standards on here are amazing.

I'm not saying it's funny. I"m saying the only "security concerns" are those which cannot even be articulated.

I"m not even saying I"m positive such concerns aren't valid. If their concerns are genuine, then all the better to act on them.

but this is a far cry from your assertion that "the left" is full of violent extremists with "Palin Derangement Syndrome" who have forced Palin to cancel an appearance.

Shakeyhands · February 10, 2011

If you look further back you will see that I agreed there were no specific threats, it was cancelled because of security concerns, obviously something you think is funny. I'll bet if it were a liberal/democrat you wouldn't think it so funny. The hypocrisy and double standards on here are amazing.

I fail to see the security concerns.

Now, if someone said something mean... well...

Edited February 10, 2011 by Shakeyhands

Black Dog · February 10, 2011

If you look further back you will see that I agreed there were no specific threats, it was cancelled because of security concerns, obviously something you think is funny. I'll bet if it were a liberal/democrat you wouldn't think it so funny. The hypocrisy and double standards on here are amazing.

If there were no threats, then what kind of security concerns are we talking about that would justify the cancellation of this event?

scribblet · February 10, 2011

I'm not saying it's funny. I"m saying the only "security concerns" are those which cannot even be articulated.

I"m not even saying I"m positive such concerns aren't valid. If their concerns are genuine, then all the better to act on them.

but this is a far cry from your assertion that "the left" is full of violent extremists with "Palin Derangement Syndrome" who have forced Palin to cancel an appearance.

Maybe they didn't want to articulate them,and neither did I say that the left is 'full of violent extremists', although they have their share, extremism isn't limited to one side of an issue.

I do think many on the left do have PDS though. the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, ...

BubberMiley · February 10, 2011

I do think many on the left do have PDS though. the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, ...

What policies? The ones on twitter or facebook?

But do you think many on the right have "ODS"?

I look forward to hearing crickets in response to that one. :lol:

Jake · February 10, 2011

If you look further back you will see that I agreed there were no specific threats, it was cancelled because of security concerns, obviously something you think is funny. I'll bet if it were a liberal/democrat you wouldn't think it so funny. The hypocrisy and double standards on here are amazing.

Oh yes, the double standards here are amazing. If it were a liberal/ democrat most on this forum would be screaming bloody hell.

guyser · February 10, 2011

If there were no threats, then what kind of security concerns are we talking about that would justify the cancellation of this event?

Really, you have to ask?

What is missing from the reports is one simple word. Here....does this now make sense?

"We have cancelled the event featuring Sarah Palin due to security concerns. We are terribly concerned for our financial security and since ticket sales are not happening, we need our money to feel more secure, thus we cancelled."

Edited February 10, 2011 by guyser

Shakeyhands · February 10, 2011

Oh yes, the double standards here are amazing. If it were a liberal/ democrat most on this forum would be screaming bloody hell.

Absolutely, if there was a specific threat...

And this PDS (or any other DS for that matter) is hilarious, just more broad strokes for those that can't come up with anything better.

bloodyminded · February 10, 2011

Maybe they didn't want to articulate them,and neither did I say that the left is 'full of violent extremists', although they have their share, extremism isn't limited to one side of an issue.

I do think many on the left do have PDS though. the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, ...

There's no paranoia, acute or otherwise.

A lot of people don't much like Palin, and/or notice that she's an ignorant demamgogue. That's it.

That's not a "derangement syndrome," but an exposure of a reasonable level of intelligence among most people.

Black Dog · February 10, 2011

Maybe they didn't want to articulate them,and neither did I say that the left is 'full of violent extremists', although they have their share, extremism isn't limited to one side of an issue.

Security concerns are a fact of life for politicians and people in the public eye. That's why they have, um, security. In the absence of a specific threat, cancelling an event is a fairly extraordinary measure to take.

When you actually read the release from the organization, it's pretty obvious that it's not Palin's physical safety that's at risk, but her feelings. In short: they were expecting people to turn up to heckle Palin and so they pulled the chute. End of story.

Black Dog · February 10, 2011

Oh yes, the double standards here are amazing. If it were a liberal/ democrat most on this forum would be screaming bloody hell.

There's a double standard all right: if a liberal/democrat cancelled an event because of the chance people their might disagree, you and your kind would be flapping their gums about what pussies left wingers are.

scribblet · February 10, 2011

There's a double standard all right: if a liberal/democrat cancelled an event because of the chance people their might disagree, you and your kind would be flapping their gums about what pussies left wingers are.

Like you et al are flapping their gums trying to discredit Palin for whatever reason comes to mind. No, I wouldn't vote for her, but I recognize double standards ( and paranoia) here when I see it. :lol:

Black Dog · February 10, 2011

Like you et al are flapping their gums trying to discredit Palin for whatever reason comes to mind. No, I wouldn't vote for her, but I recognize double standards ( and paranoia) here when I see it.

What's the double standard here, scribbles? Seriously. You keep using that term, but from the way you use it, it's pretty clear you don't understand it.

I'll explain: your claim that there's a double standard would only hold if there was a real threat. But there wasn't. Ergo: no double standard.

Also: paranoia? I'd say going as far to cancel an event (allegedly) because of safety concerns in the absence of an actual threat is paranoid.

scribblet · February 10, 2011

Try understanding yourself, obviously you don't understand double standards. If this had been a Democrat, or even a Repub. other than Palin, there would be no problem.

Shady · February 10, 2011

But I see you still haven't addressed why you think Palin's rhetoric could not possibly be hurtful, but anyone's rhetoric against her is a "security concern."

What do you mean by hurtful? Offended? Sure. People get offended by all kinds of things, everyday. Nobody has freedom from being offended. And I've never said anything about other people's rhetoric against her being a security concern. You're just making things up now. All I've done is illustrate that what she's done and said isn't any different from what other politicians have done and said in the recent past. Her rhetoric and actions are completely within the norm of politics. But when she's involved, people want to suddenly change the rules. It's classic Palin Derangement Syndrome!

If there were no threats, then what kind of security concerns are we talking about that would justify the cancellation of this event?

Who knows? Perhaps they'd like them to be left private. And if there were specific threats, those would be investigated by law enforcement, and not made public anyways. Enough with the Palin Derangement Syndrome already. You guys are being ridiculous! :lol:

Absolutely, if there was a specific threat...

Once again, specific threats aren't necessarily made public by law enforcement. I'm not sure why you people are being so obtuse.

There's no paranoia, acute or otherwise.

A lot of people don't much like Palin, and/or notice that she's an ignorant demamgogue. That's it.

That's not a "derangement syndrome," but an exposure of a reasonable level of intelligence among most people.

Nah, it's just Palin Derangement Syndrome. You, and people like you, don't like her politics. It has nothing to do with her supposed ignorance or level of intelligence. All that's just a complete ruse.

In the absence of a specific threat, cancelling an event is a fairly extraordinary measure to take.

And yet the chorus continues! Once again, specific threats don't necessarily get made public. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you PDS'ers to understand. Oops, I forgot. Palin Derangement Syndrome. That's why. :lol: