Jared Loughner, the gunman charged with wounding Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and murdering six others in Tucson on Saturday, held bizarre beliefs about “conscious dreaming” and government mind control imposed through English grammar. No serious person would connect his belief system to a mainstream political ideology. But then there’s New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. He places the blood libel of blame for the Tucson murders squarely on the shoulders of “the crowds at the McCain-Palin rallies” and “right-wing extremism.” It’s the Republicans’ fault because “the purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the GOP establishment.” Krugman’s solution is for “decent people” to “shun” those he holds accountable. But the logic of his argument leads straight to calling for official restrictions on political speech after shunning inevitably fails to do the job. The totalitarian temptation is an ever-present possibility with people like Krugman.
Another self-righteous voice in this debate is left-wing blogger Markos Moulitsas, who said in June 2008 that he was placing a “bull’s-eye” on Giffords’ and other Democratic moderates’ districts because of their vote on an intelligence bill, by which they had “sold out the Constitution.” Last week, a Kos diarist even wrote an angry rant about Giffords, declaring, “My CongressWOMAN voted against Nancy Pelosi! And is now DEAD to me!”
Let’s be clear: The Tucson crimes were not encouraged by any such heated rhetoric. Neither Kos with its rhetorical bull’s-eyes, nor the cross hair graphics on Sarah Palin’s Web site, nor the cross hairs used in the ads of nearby Arizona Democratic Rep. Harry Mitchell’s campaign in 2006, nor the bull’s-eyes used by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to “target” Republicans in 2009 have any relevance to this discussion. Their elimination for the sake of political correctness would not have saved — and will not save — a single life. Even if we find some political rhetoric repellent, this has nothing to do with murder. Unless our endgame involves burning books, banning certain kinds of speech and censoring the Internet, lest something someone says or writes might inspire some crazy person to kill someone, the discussion about “toxic political rhetoric” is a waste of time. Unless your aim is to use it as a pretext to repeal somebody’s First Amendment rights.
Which, of course, is the intent here, with the end game being the criminalization (or, at the very least, the “shunning”) of conservative speech and its purveyors.
Here’s the equation the left hopes to insinuate into the rules of legal / socially “appropriate” discourse:
Small government / fiscal responsibility = Constitutionalism
Constitutionalism = conservatism
Conservatism = hate
Hate = intolerance
*THEREFORE*
Tolerance = intolerance of conservatism
Tolerant people = not conservatives
Do the math.
Anybody doubt Obama’s next speech will touch on the importance of “tolerance” — with the background narrative already having been laid by his media accomplices that it is the Tea Party and conservatives who are engaging in vitriolic and incendiary language…?
See through it. And keep your voices loud.
outlaw.
You know you’d get less bullseye and cross hair graphics if you put a big tax on them. It would probably raise like 3 or 4 trillion over the next 10 years, so maybe that health care reform/burning corpse-powered electric plant project is not as unaffordable as was first thought.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The H2. The H2 said: RT @proteinwisdom: "Paul Krugman's totalitarian temptation" https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=24004 […]
I forecast a new line of products at Cranky-D Industries
You go off to National Guard assembly and come back and find an NYT columnist grasping at anything he can to erode freedom in the US…
So, not much changed, eh?
Jeff is absolutely right – ANY attempt to restrict speech as a result of this needs to be mocked, jeered, criticized, and pointed out to be the horseshit it is, etc.
…this needs to be mocked, jeered, criticized, and pointed out to be the horseshit it is, etc.
Politely, of course.
Mark Halperin: Conservatives should turn the other cheek when scapegoated for murder.
I for one don’t see why I should be “helpful” to those who wish to destroy liberty and America.
They’re just trying to help you, geoff. To make you perfect. You should be thanking them!
At least Darleen showed heartfelt compassion to the families and outrage at the shooting before slamming the liberal media. Jeff, not so much. So just because even though the shooter was not motivated by any tea party ideology, does Jeff consider the shooting of the congresswoman an good or bad thing. ’cause I haven’t heard him say.
Krugman can drop dead and take “Screw them” Zuniga with him.
link
Hey, trough politics —
Did you know that among the victims was a 76-year old man who worked for his church, had a bunch of stents, and threw himself on top of his wife to save her? Did you know that the dead little girl liked to ride horses, and was the granddaughter of Dallas Green?
I don’t need to go about making public some sort of proof of my compassion. Take it for granted that I’m not much in favor of innocents being gunned down by anyone. And everyone there was innocent.
Why you feel the need to suggest otherwise is just another example of an asshole trying to score points off a tragedy by going after someone on the “right.”
Fuck yourself.
By the way, “trough politics” shares an IP with alex_walter.
Crazy coincidence, I know!
What a clumsy and stupid asshole.
trough politics, I’ll dare say, is alex-walter. I don’t wonder though, to the extent that alex-walter sees fit to make play with your conscience, that alex-walter sees the murders as a good, fit for seizing for the purposes of his own pleasure at play.
Because of the ethical purity of this schizo’s POV.
Trough, do you consider the murder of a nine-year-old girl a good or a bad thing? ‘Cause I haven’t heard you say.
Don’t be so hard on Alex. It’s all he had. Shot his wad.
Trough, do you consider the crashing of jet airliners loaded with passengers, into crowded office buildings, a good or a bad thing? ‘Cause I haven’t heard you say.
Good point, McGehee. That’s why we keep you around here.
Trough, do you consider Luke Skywalker’s hand being cut off with a lightsaber by his own father a good or a bad thing? ‘Cause I haven’t heard you say.
(This is kind of fun.)
I keep trying to wear out my welcome. What’s it gonna take?
Correct!
Would you please go away now?
I keep trying to wear out my welcome. What’s it gonna take?
Go back, grasshopper, and re-read the fine works of nishi and thorazine. The answer you seek is there.
I won’t ask Trough if my being asked to go away is a good or a bad thing… ;-)
Bob Roberts. That’s where this is going.
I posted this elsewhere, sorry to be redundant.
Is anyone else surprised that trolls don’t become better at their craft through practice?
Is it realistic to imagine even a very slow child reading that comment and then wondering about Jeff’s sympathies and motivations as intended?
To be perfectly honest, I don’t really read the purported message from trolls anymore, I just immediately start wondering about their lives and the cause/s of their mental and emotional problems.
Hey, if you’re still on AOL, you get to share IP addresses with a whole shitload of other assholes.
[…] is that self-defense is not an option if it’s a Democrat doing the attacking. No matter what shit Democrats serve, the only permissible response is “Please, may I have some more?” […]
Sorry Mr McGehee, that wasn’t directed to you, it was directed to Mr Socretes at #8.
Talk about lightning striking twice in the same place! Or, at least, I wish it had.
DEATH THREAT!
Well Mr. “tough politics”/Alex_Walter, to begin with all decent people are mourning all the deaths borne out of the Tuscon shooting; especially the presumably random innocent bystanders.
It’s something that “decent” people know, and need not preface every statement with.
But to revisit a recent assertion of yours regarding fundraisers profiting off of horrific episodes, one where you asserted that “they all did it”, I’d like to raise your awareness a bit.
Within hours of the event, the ghouls at MOVEON.org had an e-mail out that naturally made the now familiar scurrilous linkages and assertions between the insane shooter and the tea-partiers/conservative. And, what do you know, it also contained a bleg for donation…
How do I know? Well, since writing them a letter challenging some of their other specious pronouncements, lo and behold, those idiots put me on their mailing list. Brilliant…
Using a random act of horrible violence to smear your political opponents with unprovable lies and reckless assertions and to raise money to continue to do the same.
The height of comity, to be sure; good men all I’m certain.
And your use of the same as an attempt at a personal jab at our host? Well, it’s right on par.
JeffG’s right; you are who we thought you were.
Vai Via, Cafone
<Señor Wences> ‘Salright. </Señor Wences>
No. You don’t get to decide who takes all the blame.
“In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King’s leaving Memphis, Tenn., after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.), a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a “trouble-maker” who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.”
Democrats have blood on their hands!!!!
h/t to Threadkiller over at JOM
This is remarkable.
So Trough, what about my other questions? And do you consider Han shooting first a good or a bad thing? ‘Cause I haven’t heard you say.
Let that be a sign unto you.
I’ve owned pets with greater self-awareness.
This from Jay Nordlinger:
Doesn’t Nordlinger give the lie to himself? Seems to me he does.
Just keep pushing back, and tying the ghouls to their acts. Don’t let up until people stop associating the murders with Tea Party politics, and instead consistently associate the murders with the Dem mouthpieces who cynically tried to use the death of a 9-year-old girl to advance their political causes.
I’d love for every talking head for the next six months to remind his audience on a regular basis that these people used the senseless murder of a 9-year-old girl to score political points. Every time one of these fothermuckers tries to accuse the Tea Party of {bad}-ism, throw this weekend’s behavior back in their face:
“You, sir, in the opening days of the New Year, used the senseless massacre of innocents to besmirch the reputation of your political opponents and to advance your own pet causes. Have you reconsidered? Have you apologized for your lack of humanity to those whose loved ones died? Have you asked forgiveness of those whose reputations you tried to ruin? If not, why on Earth should anyone listen to you now?”
If you don’t rub their noses in it, they’ll keep crapping on the carpet, and blaming you for the mess.
Nordlinger is in need of a shot of teh stanchiness , me thinks. If he is related to Rick Moran, then I am pretty sure we are at the low point of this news cycle.
I don’t know about you guys, but Julian Assange has convinced me that all this rhetoric is dangerous:
“Paul Krugman’s Totalitarian Temptatation”
I think I accidentally rented that movie on a business trip. Seven times.
[…] Congressman: If Violent Rhetoric Didn’t Cause This Shooting — It Will Cause Next One!“Paul Krugman’s totalitarian temptation”Jared Loughner’s supremacists tie debunkedDoctors give Giffords “100% chance” of […]