I have had enough with the liberals & Left pouncing on the Tucson tragedy in an attempt to score political points and reopen their anti-gun agenda; it is tactless and low. I will quickly add that violence on this scale does not happen often (not to undermine the seriousness and tragedy of when it does happen), the average law abiding citizen does not do this–including gun owners–criminals do, and this is one of the costs of a free society. Freedom comes with risk. That is no reason to push draconian legislative measures that suggest we value the promise of safety over liberty and rely on government to protect us from everything that might do us harm. Keep in mind, that the government does not possess the authority to revoke our freedom–no matter the banner they try it under.
Back to my original point: how dare liberals exploit this tragedy for leverage and use it as a chance to attack their ideological opposition for the purpose of delegitimizing their philosophy of governing! The intent of politicizing this event is to scapegoat millions of Americans under the greater Conservative umbrella who only have legitimate objections to their government. Disgusting. Sarah Palin should apologize? I think it is mutually applicable. Their [liberals] actions are ringing loud and clear and their true colors are showing: “How can we utilize our opportunity to further our political ambitions during this tragedy?”
By default, the Left is screaming that this is somehow the Tea Party’s fault, yet not a single shred of evidence exists to link Loughner to the Tea Party or any grassroots activist group–or the Right for that matter. He was a mentally imbalanced sicko who had planned this out irrespective of the political turmoil over the last year. Inflammatory rhetoric & vitriol is not the culprit here. If that argument is going to be utilized by the liberals, let’s take a look back at Obama’s rhetoric over the last 2 years, shall we?:
June 7, 2010: “I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar, we talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick.“
(In his defense of how he handled the BP oil spill.)
February 28, 2009: “I know they [the special interests and lobbyists] are gearing up for a fight as we speak. My message to them is this: so am I.”
(During a weekly radio and television address, President Obama laid out his plan to reform healthcare in America. The above was his message to the special interests opposed to his agenda.)
Summer of 2009: “If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard.”
(Although the quote is attributed to Senior White House adviser David Axelrod, it has been tied to Obama and did come from an official top source in the Administration. Given Obama’s penchant for using rhetoric that can be categorized as inflammatory, the above quote is passable for being attributed for him, as it is highly likely this kind of talk was prevalent in his entire administration.)
June 13, 2008: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama told the audience. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
(Obama echoed Sean Connery’s famous “Chicago Way” monologue during the election campaign).
September 08, 2008: “argue with people, get in their faces.”
(Obama encouraging his supporters while on the campaign trail.)
Liberals will argue that I have taken those quotes out of context in an attempt at a smear tactic against Obama, that he didn’t mean for his supporters to take those words as clearance to get violent. Exactly. He didn’t. It’s rhetoric. It is meant to fire people up to take action–activism, not violence. In that same way, the rhetoric from the Right & the Tea Party during the year of healthcare debate & protests against big government was not meant in a way to incite people to violence or to encourage people to murder their representatives. Liberals know this is true, but it is just too convenient and easy for them to point fingers at the other side(s), which is why they are doing it. To be fair, if the tables were reversed, I am sure that this kind of blaming would be coming from the Right, aimed at the Left. That’s what happens in a polarized political climate.
On another note, this is not comparable to the Oklahoma City bombing–Loughner is not a militia member or a terrorist. If he was anything other than mentally ill, judging from his video’s, favorite books (such as the Communist Manifesto), and overall views that embrace flag-burning and anti-government sentiment, he was more aligned with a Leftist mindset (albeit a non-compartmentalized one) with a fixation on conspiracy theories.
The face of a madman. Not a political hitman.
This was not a political hit. This was a criminal act of murder carried out by a mentally disturbed young man. He was suspended from community college in Tucson after five encounters with campus police between February and September last year and his behavior so frightened his classmates that they became convinced he was on the edge of a violent breakdown. Agents believe he had developed a festering and irrational hatred of Democrat Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords after she failed to answer his question – ‘What is government if words have no meaning?’ – at a political rally at his college two years ago.
Pack it up, liberals, no matter how desperately you want this to be linked to the Right or the Tea Party, it can’t be. The political rhetoric of the last year did not cause this kid to carry out this act. He had planned it out by himself and had an obsession with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords before the Tea Party became a movement and the “incendiary” rhetoric became regular on our nation’s debate scene. That being said, enough politicizing, it is going to lead to backlash against the Left and their self-appointed moralists, who are using a murder to gain a tactical advantage in future policy fights; and after the November election results, they certainly cannot afford it.
ambiguous twin 