The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel

WSJ ^ | Sunday January 9, 2010 | Glenn Reynolds

[Bigtigermike]

Shortly after November's electoral defeat for the Democrats, pollster Mark Penn appeared on Chris Matthews's TV show and remarked that what President Obama needed to reconnect with the American people was another Oklahoma City bombing. To judge from the reaction to Saturday's tragic shootings in Arizona, many on the left (and in the press) agree, and for a while hoped that Jared Lee Loughner's killing spree might fill the bill.

With only the barest outline of events available, pundits and reporters seemed to agree that the massacre had to be the fault of the tea party movement in general, and of Sarah Palin in particular. Why? Because they had created, in New York Times columnist Paul Krugman's words, a "climate of hate."

The critics were a bit short on particulars as to what that meant. Mrs. Palin has used some martial metaphors—"lock and load"—and talked about "targeting" opponents. But as media writer Howard Kurtz noted in The Daily Beast, such metaphors are common in politics. Palin critic Markos Moulitsas, on his Daily Kos blog, had even included Rep. Gabrielle Giffords's district on a list of congressional districts "bullseyed" for primary challenges. When Democrats use language like this—or even harsher language like Mr. Obama's famous remark, in Philadelphia during the 2008 campaign, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"—it's just evidence of high spirits, apparently. But if Republicans do it, it somehow creates a climate of hate.

There's a climate of hate out there, all right, but it doesn't derive from the innocuous use of political clichés. And former Gov. Palin and the tea party movement are more the targets than the source.

[Bigtigermike]

"I understand the desperation that Democrats must feel after taking a historic beating in the midterm elections and seeing the popularity of ObamaCare plummet while voters flee the party in droves. But those who purport to care about the health of our political community demonstrate precious little actual concern for America’s political well-being when they seize on any pretext, however flimsy, to call their political opponents accomplices to murder"

[wku man]

With respect to those who were killed or wounded yesterday, and to their families, the shooting is to the OKC bombing what Klinton's "war" in Kosovo was to a real war...not even close.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[SueRae]

Well said. I’m relieved (somewhat) that many publications and news analysts are stating their case.

8 years of the (soon to be most overused word in the English language) VITRIOLIC spew aimed at George Bush, the Republican Party, Tea Party and public figures like Sarah Palin, will not be ignored any longer.

We’ve kept calm, event though appalled. No longer. If the Left tries to captialize on this, it stops here. No longer will we or should we, take this lying down, turning the other cheek, or otherwise ‘sucking it up.’

Fight back with facts, over and over, example after example, quote after quote, post after post, email after email and every instance in our arsenal of the repository of Leftist hate. There is more than enough material to put forth. It’s way past time to state and restate the truth.

[TigersEye]

Great article!

[relictele]

Here’s the quote I will steal (with attribution) and paste all over the ‘net:

“To be clear, if you’re using this event to criticize the “rhetoric” of Mrs. Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you’re either: (a) asserting a connection between the “rhetoric” and the shooting, which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b) you’re not, in which case you’re just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. Which is it?”