Page 1 of 3
So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the news
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 11:25 pm
by _EAllusion
This time for accidentally tweeting white supremacist slogans:
https://Twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA/status/883271897605185536The Trump speech she is referring to
seems like it was ripped directly from the pages of American Renaissance, but I don't think a person would see that unless they have direct experience with that sort of thing. At least it has a layer of plausible deniability. So people like Ajax get to get their Pepe on while sarcastically asking what's wrong with defending Western Civ.
The 14 words comment? No chance. That's straight up neo-Naziism.
The upshot for Palin is it almost certainly was an accident. The title she was quoting came from a Brietbart contributer named Warner Todd Huston. His use of the slogan was no accident.
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 11:47 pm
by _Some Schmo
Was it an accident?
I seem to remember Palin calling rural America "the real America."
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 11:56 pm
by _EAllusion
Some Schmo wrote:Was it an accident?
Probably. See my link.
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:39 am
by _Dr. Shades
EAllusion wrote:This time for accidentally tweeting white supremacist slogans:
Umm, . . . You forgot the part wherein you tell us what the white supremacist slogans that she accidentally tweeted were.
(Following your link only brings us to a tweet about something Trump said. . . which itself is undefined. . . not anything Sarah Palin said. )
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:45 am
by _EAllusion
Dr. Shades wrote:EAllusion wrote:This time for accidentally tweeting white supremacist slogans:
Umm, . . . You forgot the part wherein you tell us what the white supremacist slogans that she accidentally tweeted were.
(Following your link only brings us to a tweet about something Trump said. . . which itself is undefined. . . not anything Sarah Palin said. )
It's explained in my links. "14 words" is frequently used by white supremacists / neo-Nazis as a slogan. It refers to "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children."
Here's a link that explains what happened in more detail:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/heres-why- ... n-14-words.
Again, it's an accident.
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:48 am
by _Dr. Shades
Hold the phone. . . so, you're telling us that the mere phrase "14 words" is not only a white supremacist slogan, but white supremacist sloganS?
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:50 am
by _EAllusion
Dr. Shades wrote:Hold the phone. . . so, you're telling us that the mere phrase "14 words" is not only a white supremacist slogan, but white supremacist sloganS?
Huh? It's a shorthand slogan for another slogan. I'm not even sure what you are trying to point out here.
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:58 am
by _Dr. Shades
EAllusion wrote:Huh? It's a shorthand slogan for another slogan.
In that case, she can hardly be faulted for inadvertently typing it.
I'm not even sure what you are trying to point out here.
After failing to find the part wherein you pointed out what the slogans were, I looked and looked two links deep and didn't find the offending slogans.
Your scenario is sort of like getting in the news for praising Nazi Germany by tweeting, "Force or no force, I really don't think the blind Chirrut Imwe could've taken out eight stormtroopers* with blasters while he was armed with only a staff."
("stormtroopers" = "sturmabtielung")
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:40 pm
by _EAllusion
Dr. Shades wrote:EAllusion wrote:Huh? It's a shorthand slogan for another slogan.
In that case, she can hardly be faulted for inadvertently typing it.
I'm not even sure what you are trying to point out here.
After failing to find the part wherein you pointed out what the slogans were, I looked and looked two links deep and didn't find the offending slogans.
Your scenario is sort of like getting in the news for praising Nazi Germany by tweeting, "Force or no force, I really don't think the blind Chirrut Imwe could've taken out eight stormtroopers* with blasters while he was armed with only a staff."
("stormtroopers" = "sturmabtielung")
Given that I described it as an accident about 4 times, I am not faulting her. But yes, it's usually possible to avoid using slogans that make for popular neo-Nazi tattoos when praising a speech that can be read as containing white supremacist dogwhistles. It's quite the unfortunate mistake. It's amusing.
"14 words" is much more specific to white supremacy. Your example of stormtroopers as used in Star Wars is weak because that's just a coopted term. They're called stormtroopers because they were meant to be Nazi-esque bad guys and pop culture knows how to distinguish referring to those stormtroopers and saying real stormtroopers were awesome. If you want a closer analogy, it'd be like proposing to form a private organization to provide physical protection for Donald Trump, then having as a symbol of the organization an American eagle holding two S shaped lighting bolts. If that's accidental, then that's one hell of an accident.
Regarding your confusion about what the slogan could've been after searching and searching:
1) I highlighted the specific phrase 14 words and provided a link to the wiki explaining what it was.
2) I swear you post from a time where google doesn't exist.
Re: So Sarah Palin managed to insert herself back in the new
Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 6:25 pm
by _NorthboundZax
EA, do you have a thought on what Palin thought she was referring to when she made the 14 words tweet? In other words, is there some 14 word phrase she would point to in Trump's speech that left everyone stunned? Or is she just echoing stuff she hears because it sounds good?