Left's hypocrisy is showing - again
One almost knew it was inevitable. After the tragic and senseless shooting in Tucson, Arizona, which left a Democrat member of Congress, Gabrielle Giffords, in critical condition and several other people dead and wounded, the left’s loonies came out with all sorts of variations of the blame game pointing at guns and "right-wingers".
Perhaps the most noxious comments of all emanated from the New York Times’ so-called "economist" Paul Krugman who immediately blamed "the right" even going so far as to say, "purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the G.O.P. establishment."
Of course, Krugman minimizes the vitriolic rhetoric of the left by saying, "Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will."
On top of that Krugman believes Beck and O’Reilly are merely "responding to popular demand." So, their every listener is a bloodthirsty right-wing lunatic longing for the death of all who see things differently from those lovable leftists?
We all know if you disagree with the left it has to be hate because they are so enlightened.
Well, let’s lift a glass to hypocrisy, shall we!
Some examples, you say? OK, let’s look at a few quickly.
Democrat President Barack Hussein Obama said in June 2008, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." Or, how about in September of 2008 when he said, "I want you to go out and talk to your neighbors … I want you to argue with them, get in their faces."
Or in March 2009, when he said, "I don’t want to quell anger. I think people have a right to be angry. I’m angry." Then there is the following from October 2010: "If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder, and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on November 2."
So, none of that rhetoric contributes to the "climate of hate?"
How about New Hampshire state house candidate Keith Halloran, who responded to the plane crash that killed Alaska Senator Ted Stevens by wishing Sarah Palin was on board? That’s not hate rhetoric?
There was another New Hampshire Democrat, Timothy Horrigan, who was forced to quit the state legislature for saying "A dead Palin would be more dangerous than a live one" and "if she was dead, she couldn’t commit any more gaffes."
Then, there’s always the Bush hatred, when liberals actually made movies about assassinating him. According to Krugman those simply don’t count.
Let’s not forget Florida Democrat Alan Grayson who claimed on the floor of the House of Representatives that Republicans wanted old people to die quickly as well as condemning his opponent as a "religious fanatic" and calling him "Taliban Dan Webster?" No, that’s just a caustic remark and mockery.
I’m sure Krugman also wouldn’t count the liberal who said back in the 1990s that she wished that Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife would feed him lots of red meat and cholesterol so he’d die at a young age of heart disease, "like so many black men." No, that’s also just a caustic remark and mockery.
One of her Democrat constituents had some rather inflammatory comments about the congresswoman on the Daily Kos blog which was subsequently removed.
Follow this link to see a screen shot of the post which was made just prior to her shooting: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c60bf53ef0148c76d84e5970c-pi.
These are the facts as they exist. A crazy lunatic targets a congresswoman nearly killing her and kills many more in the process including a nine year old girl and a federal judge. The gunman was identified as 22-year-old Jared Loughner whom many describe as a "disturbed young man" who often "kept to himself."
Classmates in his college classes said he was "obviously disturbed" and "disrupted class frequently with nonsensical outbursts." Where is the blame that rightly should be placed on the perpetrator?
Why is the outrage placed on an inanimate object (guns) and participants in political dialogue rather than acknowledging an individual accountability on the part of Loughner? Could it be because doing so would not serve the political agenda of the accusers?
What’s even more disturbing is a report indicating Loughner was well-known to Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik since numerous complaints had been filed with his office as a result of death threats to many citizens in Pima County including staff of Pima Community College, radio personalities and local bloggers.
Perhaps Sheriff Dupnik’s rush to politicize the even was meant to deflect any potential criticism of his office for failure to act on credible threats made by a seriously unbalanced human being.
One can only wonder if the fact Loughner had a relative working for Pima County as a Natural Resource specialist for the Pima County Parks and Recreation played any part in the Sheriff’s reluctance to act.
Perhaps if Sheriff Dupnik had actually arrested Loughner that criminal record would have precluded his purchase of the handgun used to injure and kill so many.
Calling someone a socialist because that is their political philosophy is not inflammatory, but calling someone a Nazi or fascist just because they disagree with you is.
The left is the undisputed master of political polemics so it is they who should tone down the volume and do as the Bible says by plucking the shaft from their own eye.