The Hateful Left: Where incendiary political rhetoric truly resides in America

Judging from his website, I would guess that Jared Lee Loughner suffers from schizophrenia. The man who opened fire with a nine-millimeter Glock in Tucson, Arizona, on Saturday was obsessed with mind control and bizarre, incomprehensible theories of currency and government. He read books by Hitler, Marx, Plato, and Orwell, among others. He did not believe in God. By all appearances, his mind was ruined by madness and his soul by evil. In any case, he murdered a nine-year-old child, a federal judge, and four others while wounding at least twelve, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Blue Dog Democrat well liked on both sides of the aisle.

I wasn’t going to write anything about the incident because—unlike, say, the frequent and ongoing atrocities inspired by the very intent of Islamism or Communism—it didn’t seem to be a murder caused by any sort of coherent idea. Bad ideas have to be answered by the best ones we’ve got, or they continue to claim the minds of believers and the lives of the just. Madness and evil, on the other hand, are simply things that happen in this broken world. The only proper response is the one in King Lear: “Howl, howl, howl, howl!”

But while little useful can be said about the murders themselves, the rush to narrative of our dishonest and increasingly desperate leftist media does have to be addressed. The Left—which has been unable to discover any common feature uniting acts of Islamist violence worldwide—nonetheless instantly noticed a bridge between the Tucson shooting and its own political opponents. The Chicago Sun-Times ran a slavering editorial blaming “the right.” MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson suggested that the killings were inspired by right-wing rhetoric. Politico’s Roger Simon did the same.

But the New York Times was perhaps the worst offender. On its front page, and in its patented smarmily suggestive style, it also implied that Loughner was somehow set off by conservative rhetoric and the Tea Party. “The original health care legislation stirred strong feelings that flared at angry town hall meetings held by many Democratic lawmakers during the summer of 2009,” said the Times, stroking its figurative chin over possible motives for the atrocity. “And there has been broader anger and suspicion rising about the government, its finances and its goals, with the discourse partially fueled by talk shows and Web sites. Tea Party activists also condemned the shooting.”

The Times’s Paul Krugman—who once encouraged readers to hang pro-war Democratic senator Joseph Lieberman in effigy—chimed in on his blog, deploring right-wing political rhetoric and linking a Sarah Palin–backed political ad to the murders. The Palin ad depicted rifle crosshairs on several lawmakers’ names, including Gifford’s, indicating that they were targeted to be voted out of office. (Prominent left-winger Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos website did much the same thing, putting a bull’s-eye on Gifford because her views were too moderate for him.)

To be sure, there is a lot of heated rhetoric in American politics, as ever. For instance, last spring, three Democratic congressmen cruelly slandered Tea Party members by accusing them of spitting on them and calling them racial slurs—a charge that was reported as true by the Times even after it was thoroughly debunked by videotapes of the event. Film director Rob Reiner compared the Tea Party to the Nazis on Bill Maher’s HBO show last October. And in May, New York mayor Michael Bloomberg infamously blamed an Islamist attempt to bomb Times Square on “someone who didn’t like health care or something.” Indeed, the Left’s hysterical response to all who disagree with it—that they are racist or sexist or “phobic” or somehow reminiscent of Hitler—has become so predictable that satirists, from the libertarian Greg Gutfeld to the liberal Jon Stewart, have made fun of it in routines.

But never mind that, because the Left’s sudden talk about incendiary political rhetoric in the wake of the Arizona shooting isn’t really about political rhetoric at all. It’s about the real-world failure of leftist policies everywhere—the bankrupting of nations and states by greedy unions and unfundable social programs, the destruction of inner cities by identity politics, and the appeasement of Muslim extremists in the face of worldwide jihad, not to mention the frequently fatal effects of delirious environmentalism. Europe is in debt and on fire. American citizens are in political revolt. Even the most left-wing president ever is making desperate overtures to his right.

But all that might be tolerable to leftists if they weren’t starting to lose control of the one weapon in which they have the most faith: the narrative. The narrative is what leftists believe in instead of the truth. If they can blame George W. Bush for the economic crisis, if they can make Sarah Palin out to be an idiot, if they can call the Tea Party racist until you think it must be true, they might yet retain power in spite of the international disgrace of their ideas. And though they still mostly dominate the narrative on the three broadcast networks, most cable stations, most newspapers, and much of Hollywood, nonetheless Fox News, talk radio, the Internet, and the Wall Street Journal have begun to respond in ways they can’t ignore.

That’s the hateful rhetoric they’re talking about: conservatives interrupting the stream of leftist invective in order to dismantle their arguments with the facts. As for leftists’ reaction to the Arizona shooting, call it Narrative Hysteria: a frantic attempt to capitalize on calamity by casting their opponents, not merely as racist or sexist or Islamophobic this time, but as somehow responsible for an act of madness and evil. Shame on them.

Blood libel

I know why powerful idiots on the left hate us.

It's because paid professional democrat 'war room' types send them fake letters - supposedly from conservatives - that are targeted to evoke hate. They've been doing it since the Clinton years - and it's NOT a well kept secret.

They come up with crazy hateful stuff and write it as though it came from a conservative... then send the dripping mess to reporters, movie makers and 'influential' types. Professionals do the work - these people were thrilled with the internet because it allowed them to make the letters more 'authentic sounding'.

Blood libel.

Liberals are haters - they gin up rage against conservatives... with tactics no different than what Joseph Goebbels would would use.

The Left—which has been unable to discover any common feature uniting acts of Islamist violence worldwide—nonetheless instantly noticed a bridge between the Tucson shooting and its own political opponents.

I, for one, am fed up by the continued, unwarranted attacks on conservatives. These mental defectives----- liberal and progressive nut jobs included------have a neurotic, self-absorbed need to be number one. They demean conservatives so that they can "feel good" about themselves....to pump up their sick moral superiority. They would sacrifice everything good in America just to satiate their own self-serving needs. Freud would have a field day with this bunch. These people are haters with all-consuming personality disorders.

As Mark Steyn points out: Major Nidal Malik Hasan jumped on a table and gunned down US soldiers---his then-comrades---- while screaming, "Allahu Akbar," which AG Eric Holder says is Arabic for "nothing to see here".

Holder guessed the Times Square SUV bomber, Shazad, was upset by foreclosure proceedings on his house. Mortgage-related issues-----nothing to do with months of training at a Taliban camp in Waziristan.

Interesting that Holder can't see the hand of "radical Islam" in attacks on American soil but quickly concluded, without ever reading the bill, that Arizona's immigration law was dangerous, and, "might lead to racial profiling."

Holder repeatedly fanned the flames of racial and ethnic tension----the exact opposite of what Americans should expect from the nation's chief law enforcement officer.

Immediately after Obama appointed Holder to the top job, Holder held a news conference and called America "a nation of cowards," WRT racial issues........w/ Obama's approval.

======================================

Americans need to be very vigilant----the Ohaha admin has targeted conservatives. These vindictive, hate-filled progressives will do anything to shut us up. This is indicative of a very disturbing government mindset. Obama/Incompetano's documented hatred of Americans, and their orders to L/E to surveil and supress Americans......contrasts sharply with their kid glove handling of drug lords, Third World savages, and terrorists bent on violence and destruction.

THE COCKEYED WORLD OF OBAMA/INCOMPETANO: A VERY DISTURBING GOVT MINDSET Obama/Incompetano pulled out all the stops to go after American "extremists" but seem "unable" to go after bombers and terrorists.

Keep in mind, Americans look at savage Mexican drug cartels, the undie bomber and Shazad with fear and trepidation, and demand justice. Ohaha, Incompetano, Holder, Emanuel, Axelrod, Soros and that bunch, look at them with kindness and understanding, b/c they are out to "get" those evil Americans.

OHAHA/DHS PROFILES AMERICANS--HATRED OF AMERICANS SPEWS FORTH No more proof is needed than Obama/Incompetano's profiling Americans as “rightwing extremists.”

On April 7, 2009, their hatred of Americans spewed full force as DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis sent out a nationwide alert to US L/E to act against "evil" conservatives. DHS identified “rightwing extremists” as a "danger" and defined “rightwing extremists” in a footnote, as follows.

OBAMA/INCOMPETANO ORDER L/E TO SUPPRESS AND DESTROY AMERICANS. EXCERPT DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis to L/E: "Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

DHS later said that the report was not an attempt to squash First Amendment Rights for conservatives----only "hate groups"---- but, there was NO attempt to exempt anyone from these broad generalizations.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.