RSS 2.0 Follow Us!
 

Related Posts

In Defense of the “Blame Game” (Response to Zombie)

John on March 5, 2010 at 9:13 pm

Zombie has some timely thoughts about “the blame game” that takes place every time some guy takes a shot near a public building. Michelle Malkin seconds Zombie.

Let me start by saying that I have the utmost respect for both Michelle and Zombie; however, in this case I’m going to disagree with both of them and, I hope, make a coherent case why the blame game is both inevitable and even necessary. But first, here’s Zombie’s take:

We all know that John Patrick Bedell and Joseph Stack are basically insane, plain and simple — as are any number of similar whackjobs who periodically go loco and erupt into violence. Violent psychopaths often incorporate some seemingly random overarching theme into their mindset, and on occasion that theme involves politics. Whenever someone like Bedell or Stack goes ballistic, every pundit jumps into the fray and tries to spin the outburst as “exemplifying” the political viewpoint of those with whom the pundit disagrees. But that only rises to the level of a valid argument when a distinct pattern emerges.

As I see it, a distinct pattern has emerged with regard to political violence. Two distinct patterns actually…

Pattern 1:

Violence by liberals (and this is just a recent sampling) is a real pattern. I don’t think we should go out of our way to avoid talking about it.

Granted, some of the people involved in these incidents are simply nuts. Bedell may be one of those, I don’t know. Amy Bishop (whose crime was personal, not political) was certainly a loon apart from her liberal views. Nuts can arise on the left and the right. I’m not suggesting otherwise.

That said, Joe Stack wasn’t crazy. If you read his note, he was lucid. He acted on his belief that violence was the only way to affect change. What he did was extreme, but not insane. It was a rational act from his own very warped perspective.

Moving on to Pattern #2:

  • Stories of liberal violence either don’t appear in the press at all…
    • You won’t find any coverage of that CPC arson in the MSM.
  • When stories do appear the motive of the perpetrator is either unknown or unknowable (unless they can blame it on the right wing)…
    • How many MSM outlets drew the obvious conclusion about the torching of Palin’s church?
    • How many MSM outlets connected the attack on Mr. Gladwell to SEIU and the Democrats?
    • Don’t forget the census worker, another victim of right-wing violence who turned out to have killed himself.
  • When all else fails the press and their liberal allies just lie…
    • After Gladwell was attacked the SEIU sent out word that “Seven teabaggers arrested at Missouri town-hall event today. One SEIU staffer sent to hospital.” TPM and others also conveniently got the story backwards.
    • Both the Washington Post and the NY Times labeled Joe Stack a right wing terrorist and ignored his anti-Bush, anti-religion, pro-Communism statements, literally editing them out of Stack’s suicide note.
    • Already some outlets (the Christian Science Monitor) are doing the same with John Bedell, labeling this pot-smoking, anti-Bush Truther and registered Democrat a “right-winger.”
    • Don’t forget when Media Matters suggests JFK was a victim of right-wing violence even though his assassin, Lee Oswald, was a Communist.
    • They even saw “domestic violence” in the Tebow ad!

So these are the patterns that exist. Liberals commit violence with regularity. The press ignores, downplays or outright lies about it as a matter of course.

The blame game is already being played and those of us on the right are perpetually the ones being blamed, even when the evidence strongly points in the other direction (Joe Stack and John Bedell).

Taking the high road is an honorable approach. Unfortunatley, the NY Times is not honorable. If every one of these charges is not strongly rebutted, the big lie will set in. I believe we have a responsibility to set the record straight. And if that means turning the blame back where it belongs or pointing out the pattern of violence on the left, then so be it.

I guess it comes down to this. The “blame game” isn’t a game. The charge of right-wing extremism (much of it driven by the SPLC) has been one of the chief tools used by Democrats against their conservative opponents since Obama took office. Refusing to play out of principle is choosing not to fight a public relations battle which conservatives can’t afford to lose.

Post to Twitter

Category: Politics |

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.