Heated Rhetoric?

A very bad thing happened yesterday.  A deranged man attacked a public figure, for a reason that only he might know.  In the process, he also attacked and killed others who may, or may not have been intended targets.  Apparently the initial target was a Democrat, and he used a gun.

As was expected, there is posturing in the editorial theater about where the responsibility lays for yesterdays horrific act.  As was also expected, the initial barrage was aimed at conservative groups or individuals for ‘fanning the flames’ with talk radio, tea parties etc.  And there is no surprise that Sarah Palin, whom the left fears with the darkest and seemingly largest parts of their souls, would become a target yet again.

While there are countless blogs, and news articles that link Palin’s electoral target map to this one man’s insanity,  I will present the work of merely ONE writer, as it encompasses the complete propaganda package in it’s entirety.

In The Demographics of political violence, I immediately found a little disappointment with the title.  It had nothing about demographics, no charts indicating whom is more likely to perpetrate such heinous violence, or nothing that indicated a count at all.  Nothing of a statistical nature seemed obvious, but for this small section:

“Some demographics of political violence can be measured.

Most such acts are carried out by men between the ages of 16 and 30. Their susceptibility to violently act out increases during periods of economic decline.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the number of hate groups has increased by 54 percent since 2000.

The center attributes much of the increase to the election of an African-American president and fears about Latino immigration – an issue of particular concern in Arizona.

While the overall rate of hate crimes has stayed fairly steady, crimes against gays and Hispanics have reached record high numbers, according to the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.”

The link that is preceded by the 16-30 age mention, discusses economically challenged dumb youth,  crowded dumb youth, and the seemingly politically disenfranchised crowded dumb youth.  Other expert testimony, is provided by the Southern Poverty group, which as a matter of course seeks to paint conservatives and constitutionalists with a racist brush.  The final reference made, is to a ‘human rights’ organization which cannot understand why we don’t all get along.  Especially since we have enacted such innovative ‘hate crime’ legislation.

Sadly, there is nothing learned here, except that there will always be those who try to make such tragedy become their clarion call for the silencing of conservative voices and opinion.

I left a reply.

I doubt it will be approved, as my own dissent is likely measured as unproductive action in their realm of self serving demagoguery.  I did however save a copy to post here. I said:

The sheriff is off his nut.

And the shooter is probably crazy.

But relating it to Palin or the tea parties, or talk radio is absurd.  Look at the characteristics of this atheist, kicked out of the military,  individual who thinks America is a terrorist state, who likes flag burning, and considers the police unconstitutional.

Anyone who thinks this guy was motivated by conservatives needs a class in remedial reasoning.  Mislabeling of the situation does not help anyone.

In fact, lets talk about pulling stories down.
A daily KOS blogger, only two days prior, posted this:    – begin copied text –

My CongressWOMAN voted against Nancy Pelosi! And is now DEAD to me!

by BoyBlue
Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 11:07:17 AM PST

I am from the Tucson area and live in Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords’ district. I worked like a dog for her elections when she was in the Arizona House, surrounded by rightwing nutcases. When Arizona re-districted in 2002, a seat opened up and she was right smack in the middle of it. So was I because I live in Oro Valley, Arizona, which is at the heart of that – then – new CD. I was one of several people to talk her into running and pledging complete loyalty and pledging to raise as much money as possible for her.

She ended up running for the first time against a fellow AZ House member, Randy Graf who was a rightwing whacko who advocated guns in bars and was the “Russell Pearce before Russell Pearce” vis-a-vis border issues. With a LOT of hard work and plenty of money, Gabby won. Easier than thought, too. I never like to throw money in people’s faces, but i have given Gabrielle Giffords THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of dollars in both good times and bad times for me financially.

* BoyBlue’s diary :: ::
*

Fast forward to this election season. A weirdo asshole named Jesse Kelly who advocated ELIMINATING Social Security and was a tea bagger favorite got the GOP nom to run against her. I am gay and had been married and my spouse left me January 15, 2010. I shot myself in the mouth in a serious suicide attempt, because of that. Barely surviving, I spent two months in the hospital and still have some paralysis. I did receive a severance from my employer, as i had been laid off in December, 2009. That may have been part of the reason my spouse left me.

Anyway, after months of physical and mental rehab, I got back into the political scene and started working for Gabby once again. I raised over $100,000 for her and maxed her out myself out of my severance, even though i still don’t have work and could not qualify for state aid because of my severance.

She wins her re-election and told me she was still a supporter of Speaker Pelosi at her victory party. We talked about how Nancy Pelosi was a successful woman and accomplished oh so much in just four years as Speaker.

Today, just a little while ago, I saw on Andrea Mitchell Reports (out of the one eye in can still see out of) that Giffords voted AGAINST Nancy Pelosi as our Minority Leader. Rhetorical question:  I fought back from my condition and jumped in with both feet to help Gabrielle Giffords for THIS shit???

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is dead to me now. I won’t lift a finger, make one phone call, nor will i EVER vote for her in the future. And why did she do this? Giffords never told me she was conservative Democrat. And her voting record is okay. Damn.

– end copied text –

Somehow, because it does not fit into the storyline that many liberals would like to promote, this does not get talked about when mentioning heated rhetoric.

Where do you suppose an investigator would look first if doing his job properly?  The work of THIS writer, or in Alaska?

A screen shot of the blue boys’  article can be found over at the blog profs site.

Ultimately, with these things, it does no one any good to apply labels at all.   This man did assault and murder, and shall have to pay for his horrific acts in some way, either here or in the hereafter.  Pretending to offer insight to his motivations without intimate knowledge of his internal workings is indeed absurd.

Absurd, but not surprising from those who have an agenda to silence the spirit of this country.

13 comments for “Heated Rhetoric?

  1. January 9, 2011 at 11:46 am

    You say you left a comment on our site. We find no evidence of that – moderated or otherwise.

    You write: “Sadly, there is nothing learned here, except that there will always be those who try to make such tragedy become their clarion call for the silencing of conservative voices and opinion.”

    On the contrary, we noted in our post:

    “The killer’s motivations are unknown. The alleged gunman, 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner, reportedly has invoked his Fifth Amendment rights and is not talking to authorities. His behavior, as described by administrators at Pima Community College, and as evidenced by videos he had posted on the Internet, had become erratic in recent months.”

    AND…”Although the most egregious examples in the last campaign come from the right, conservatives don’t have a lock on violent rhetoric or violent actions. A woman claiming to be a former high school classmate of Loughner has described him as liberal.”

    Seems to us you’re guilty of the very charges you’re levelling at others. You’ve misled, and skewed the facts to fit your own views.

    • JGillman
      January 9, 2011 at 1:28 pm

      If you cannot find the post, then your system needs attending to. That or you lied, deleted already, and feel you must defend yourself in some way now. Of course, I do not know you, and pretend not to KNOW your inner workings, so instead I would say get the web mechanic in there.

      You still used this in the manner I described.

      The ‘woman claiming to be’ reference after pointing out the “the most egregious examples in the last campaign come from the right,” and those two examples you present are A. confirmed to have inciteful intent, and B. are exclusionary of all other clips of the day. Do you want me to dig up the volumes of hate for Palin, or for her children? What about for the African American tea party protesters who received death threats? Because you didn’t include those references your thesis is incomplete and flawed.

      Further, you present the “Prominent politicians have led the way. Sarah Palin published the infamous map showing crosshairs targeting congressional districts, including Giffords’s. The map was quickly removed Saturday from Palin’s web site.” theme as if it promotes this type of activity. You posted THAT immediately after saying: “The lunatic fringe is no longer a fringe.” Timing in an article like this is MEANT to move passions.

      Why bring it up if not your intent?

      Nah.. maybe you don’t see it. I am not at all surprised.

    • JGillman
      January 9, 2011 at 1:30 pm

      BTW.. I send folks to Muckety all the time. Quite a unique idea.

  2. January 9, 2011 at 1:39 pm

    We appreciate your posting our response.

    Perhaps there’s a problem with our WordPress setup, tho it’s not something anyone else has pointed out. No, we didn’t lie about not receiving your input and we didn’t delete it. The accusation, however, reflects so well on someone who says he can’t pretend to know other people’s motivations.

    As far as Palen’s actions: You have to wonder why, if there was nothing wrong with the crosshairs map, she removed it so quickly.

    • January 9, 2011 at 8:20 pm

      Palen? Who’s Palen? Oooooooooohhhhhhh… you probably meant Palin. Well, Laurie, would it make a difference if the Dimocrat Leadership Council used bullseye’s?

      2004:
      http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253055&kaid=127&subid=171

      To you? Probably not evil ’cause Dimocrats are the only opinions that matter.

      LibTards are so pathetically sanctimonious.

    • January 10, 2011 at 1:22 pm

      Jason,

      We did find your post. It had been sent to spam, squeezed between posts about a prescription drug and “space sex.”

      I’m not sure why it went to spam. Maybe because it included the words asshole and shit – neither of which we allow, but you must, so I repeat them here. (I believe both words were used in quotes you pulled from other sites.)

  3. Christopher
    January 9, 2011 at 10:00 pm

    All intelligent human beings get that things like drawn maps with cross hairs on them understand that the crosshairs are not metaphors for violence. They a way to focus action, money, and concentration in the same way that an actual rifle scope does.

    Leftest, such as fellow Michigander Dr. Ron Chusid, a democratic shill for Obamacare, is almost giddy over the shooting of Ms. Gillfords. To him, the actual human lives lost are of little real concern. The important thing is the opportunity to smear a right-center country w/guilt by association.

    To him and his fellow travelers, this is anything but a tragedy — the guy is garbage, really. He’s also terrified of Palin’s popularity because it’s such a threat to power hungry leftest liberals. see: http://tinyurl.com/27rpfwj

    For bigger government shills like Dr. Ron Chusid and his ilk, Ms. Gillford being tragically shot by a distributed individual with vague & general “right-wing” sentiments is the best thing that’s happened to them since Democrats lost so badly in the midterm elections.

  4. January 10, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    Re:
    >> … Ms. Gillford being tragically shot by a distributed individual with vague & general “right-wing” sentiments is the best thing that’s happened to them since Democrats lost so badly in the midterm elections.

    Even in the wake of this week’s events – especially in the wake of this week’s events, this sort of language is just shocking.

    • JGillman
      January 10, 2011 at 5:39 pm

      Demonstrating the absurd with the absurd.

      I believe he is making a point. Chusid’s language undoubtedly more civil?

      Anyhow the ‘crosshairs’ are in fact surveyors’ symbols. Even smart folks might confuse them. Even so, this senseless violence has NOTHING to do with it. When someone can make a coherent argument that it does, let me know.

    • Christopher
      January 10, 2011 at 8:31 pm

      Shocking but true. And here’s more shock for you:

      Not a single person pushing the blame-Palin line has offered a shred of evidence that Loughner ever saw Palin’s electoral map, was motivated by it, was right-wing (anectodally it appears Loughner was quite left-wing as of a few years ago), was motivated by right-wing radio, or did any of the things being assumed by the left-blogosphere, the mainstream media and some Democratic politicians.

      Not a shred of evidence connecting Loughner to Palin, the Tea Parties, or the right wing, yet the left-blogosphere, mainstream media and Democratic politicians have erupted into a frenzy of name-calling directed at Palin and those who oppose Obama’s agenda.

      In few days the claim that Palin’s graphic somehow caused this is going to be seen as crazy as it really is, and when they find that the shooter had no ties with with the tea party, the GOP or the libertarians, all who want smaller government, liberals are going to be seen in their true light: as blood libelest who used a national tragedy to try to achieve political ends that they couldn’t after the mid-term elections, not to mention advocating for a crackdown on constitutionally protected political speech.

      It is the left wing pushing this blood libel on a any person or group they don’t like. That’s what’s really shocking.

      This will backfire on liberals.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.

Loading Facebook Comments ...