Never let a tragedy go to waste

Leftists and big media (but I repeat myself) are jumping at the chance to blame the Tucson shooting on heated political speech.

For an antidote to the stupid and craven politicization of the murders, please see the following:

Temple of Mut: The media distortions of the Tucson tragedy.

Left Coast Rebel: Did Daily Kos incite shooting? and These people have by design, and presumably in the hopes of gaining some perverse political advantage, attempted to politicize the horrible events of Saturday.

Slate's Jack Shafer: In Defense of Inflamed Rhetoric:
The awesome stupidity of the calls to tamp down political speech in the wake of the Giffords shooting.

Embedded in Sheriff Dupnik's ad hoc wisdom were several assumptions. First, that strident, anti-government political views can be easily categorized as vitriolic, bigoted, and prejudicial. Second, that those voicing strident political views are guilty of issuing Manchurian Candidate-style instructions to commit murder and mayhem to the "unbalanced." Third, that the Tucson shooter was inspired to kill by political debate or by Sarah Palin's "target" map or other inflammatory outbursts. Fourth, that we should calibrate our political speech in such a manner that we do not awaken the Manchurian candidates among us.

And, fifth, that it's a cop's role to set the proper dimensions of our political debate. Hey, Dupnik, if you've got spare time on your hands, go write somebody a ticket.

Dupnik, by the way, is a long-time leftist who refused to enforce, and was a media hog speaking out against, Arizona's immigration law.

Nevermind that in this case, the shooter was a complete nut who's been listening to the voices in his head a lot more than he's been listening to political discussion.

This is an attempt if not to silence dissent, to blunt it by barring legitimate expression of outrage at government policy.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

You can take my political rhetoric when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds in WSJ: The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel.

And here's Pennsylvania Democrat Robert Brady, proud to be the first to wipe his ass with the First Amendment while at the same time codifying the protected Ruling Class:
Pennsylvania Rep. Robert Brady, a Democrat from Philadelphia, told CNN that he also plans to take legislative action. He will introduce a bill that would make it a crime for anyone to use language or symbols that could be seen as threatening or violent against a federal official, including a member of Congress.

And these people have a VERY broad definition of what "could be seen" as "threatening."

Exit pop quiz: Who said, "If they bring a knife to a fight, we bring a gun"?


Mutnodjmet said...

Thanks for the link. Frankly, the attack on our First Amendment rights is the scariest part of this whole sad story (which reminds me of the Virgina Tech shooting more than anything else).

Negocios Loucos said...

Sean Connery!?!? Knife to a gun fight quote???

The disinformation and election interference is coming from inside the house

The FBI just admitted in court that Hunter Biden's laptop is real. Here are 20 minutes of Joe Biden, U.S. intelligence officials, and th...