In the aftermath of this weekend’s horrific shooting in Tuscon, I really can’t which I am more disgusted by…
The press falling all over themselves to be the first to declare Rep. Giffords dead. Story after story spewed forth from the Ordinary Ministers of the Media, citing no sources than each other, declaring her dead. Accuracy and integrity, be damned. The fact that family members may see these baseless reports never even entered into their minds. Disgusting. (Hats off to KOLD Tuscon for refusing to do so.)
In the absence of any real information, network after network filled the air with talking heads of various stripes spewing nonsense. One anchor said that “19 people shot meant an automatic weapon had to be involved and those are ILLEGAL!” Huh? Ever hear of an extended clip or maybe more than one gun? Another network had a doctor mouthing off about what kind of brain injury she must have, with no evidence at all. The lack of intelligence and the lack of humility is a bad combination. I wanted to throw things at the television.
But as bad as TV was, the interwebs was worse. I have never seen such a river of opportunistic vitriol. People on Twitter were disgusting. I followed the #Giffords hashtag for 30 minutes in hopes of getting the latest. What I saw instead was a rapid river of hate flowing faster than I could read it. I called Matt and read some of them over the phone. I stunned him into silence which, believe me you, ain’t easy to do.
But that was the interwebs, I consoled myself. But soon after the same hate made its way into TV and print commentary as well. Olberman, Krugman, et al. News agencies mention Sarah Palin in stories on Giffords a half dozen times for no reason. Unfathomable. In speaking about the rush off attacks on Sarah Palin, Glenn Reynolds makes a point about all the disgusting opportunists this weekend.
To be clear, if you’re using this event to criticize the “rhetoric” of Mrs. Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you’re either: (a) asserting a connection between the “rhetoric” and the shooting, which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b) you’re not, in which case you’re just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. Which is it?
I understand the desperation that Democrats must feel after taking a historic beating in the midterm elections and seeing the popularity of ObamaCare plummet while voters flee the party in droves. But those who purport to care about the health of our political community demonstrate precious little actual concern for America’s political well-being when they seize on any pretext, however flimsy, to call their political opponents accomplices to murder.
Where is the decency in that?
Now some conservatives are falling into a trap by using scant information to try and paint the deranged loser gunman as a lefty. Don’t do it. Don’t be like them. He may be a lefty at the end of the day, but let the facts come out. At the end of the day, even if he is a Marxist, that really had nothing to do with it. I know some see it as a defense against the loony charges that he must be a tea-partier, but don’t do it. Don’t be like them.
Integrity. It comes down to that. In the rush to be first to news, in the rush to have titillating commentary, in the rush to score political points, and in the resulting rush to defend, so many threw their integrity right out the window.
We saw the worst aspects of human nature this weekend, and not just in Tuscon.
January 10, 2011 at 4:45 am
Yeah I love how your first reaction isn't to actually look at the hateful, vitriolic B.S. you trade in, but to wash your hands of all guilt.
When Glen Beck legitimizes wild conspiracy theories that insinuate the FDA is attempting to starve people and FEMA is starting deaths camps, and when Sarah Palin puts gunsights over people how long do you think it will be before someone misconstrues this as a call to violence. Do you really find that far fetched. Or when you actually try to claim that people who support legal abortion are supporting murder how long do you think it will be before someone takes up a gun. You idiots are such myopic self involved twits you can't understand the meaning of the words you say. Let me ask you, if you really believe abortion is killing a human being then why don't you do something about it? By your reasoning about 8 Holocausts have happened since 1972 and the most you did was hold up signs and write moronic blog posts. You idiots don't believe your own BS but you're too stupid to think through the consequences of feeding it someone who might. And then you all pathetically run for the disinfectant shower when you come face to face with the consequences of your idiotic rantings.
Respect for human life my ass. You try to convince people that whole groups of their fellow neighbors are equivalent to murderers, or Maoists, or Nazis and you act surprised when one goes off the rails. Respect for human life my ass.
January 10, 2011 at 5:58 am
Bill – you seem a bit angry…
Why is it that people that spew vitriol are always "anonymous" or have a profile that is "secret?"
I'm proud, as are the Archbolds, to use our real names and stand up for what we believe in. Why do you find it necessary to hide?
January 10, 2011 at 8:00 am
Wow, anonymous! That diatribe is right out of Alinskey's "Rules for Radicals". If you can't have a reasoned debate, just hurl insults. Bill Ayres should be proud.
January 10, 2011 at 10:53 am
congratulations Adrienne for being proud of your vile hatred!! a true christian through and through!!
January 10, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Congrats, Bill, for proving Pat's point in the first comment on the thread.
People like Bill disgust me. They were ready to use this shooting as a political weapon as soon as they heard the Congresswoman had a D next to her name. Even though everything that has come up about this shooter contradicts everything they're saying, it doesn't stop them from making baseless rants. Bill doesn't give a fig about the loss of human life, but he enthusiastically embraces it as a way to score political points. Disgusting.
January 10, 2011 at 12:30 pm
This is not the first time I've heard Bill's argument. It is a common argument of "liberal" students still wracking up the debt. "Oh you don't actually believe what you are saying!" Funny, the other side of the debate is (in my experience) under the assumption that people generally stand up for what they actually believe in.
I didn't know that actually having principles was considered hatred. I guess that must be why practicing Christians are despised: we actually give a d@#n.
I read the article last night, but checked back in this morning because some of the people who comment on this site are entertaining. Be not quick to judge. Good advice for us all, I think!
I have no idea whether or not my profile is public or private . . . the finer aspects of technology evade me (I guess that's why my major is one that is book-centered instead of technology centered!).
January 10, 2011 at 1:45 pm
The murderer is a nutjob, no matter what his political leanings may be, left right or other. He and he alone is responsible for the deaths of 6 people and injuries to 14 others. To try and blame anyone other than him is disgusting opportunism.
Those pushing the blame on "hateful vitriol" seem to want to point out who is responsible for said hateful vitriol, including calling them bigots. Thus they contribute to the hateful vitriol they are decrying.
If someone makes an attempt on Sarah Palin's life, will the media blame themselves for conflating this murderous nutcase with her and the Tea Party? Call me crazy, but I doubt it. (Which is fine, since it would still be caused by a psychopath and not rhetoric.)
January 10, 2011 at 1:50 pm
The shooter was mentally ill. These type of people are attracted to any type of extreme ideas or rhetoric. And unfortunately, some will act on it. But, most people afflicted with a severe form of mental illness don't need any outside influence to drive them to this kind of behaviour. The paranoid thoughts and voices generated by their broken brains is more than enough to cause tragic events like the one in Tucson.
January 10, 2011 at 3:02 pm
At the end of the day, these are all people we write about, created in the image and likeness of God. The gunman is a person too, whether he chose the horrible act freely or was provoked by a mental condition. The real tragedy is that an event like this one is successful in making many people degrade each other and become like animals.
When we react savagely to a savagery, we are not living up to our own human dignity. It makes me sad and fearful for our culture to continually witness ourselves descending into the depths of savagery that the Romans delighted in before their civilization fell.
Thank you for your blog. It is a gift to all of us who look for the hope of good people who are still sickened and saddened when they see evil.
January 10, 2011 at 3:22 pm
Why would a liberal kill a Democratic US Rep? It's clear the right didn't go telling him to do this – he wouldn't have listened. So, logically, he was either insane (likely) or the left told hm to do this (possible, but why? The Rep opposed Nancy Pelosi for House Minority leader and the Daily Kos picked up on it, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything).
Those saying that the right is promoting a general climate of political violence need to look into the number of violent crimes at Tea Parties (zero), Beck rallies (zero), etc. Is the right capable of violence? Sure. I mean, there's the opposition to Martin Luther King, Jr. (oh, wait, that was Democrats), the KKK (oh, wait, that was Southern Democrats), the Know-Nothings (Democrats), but I'm sure we can find some conservatives to blame for past violence…
Seriously, are conservatives always peaceful? No, of course not. Are we perfect? No, of course not. However, blaming conservatives for making an atmosphere of violence is nothing short of ignorant.
Simple fact: the shooter was nuts, no matter what motivated him. No one is to blame but him. However, the kind of rhetoric that inflames the passions of the insane…that's not something exclusive to conservatives.
January 10, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Action will cause the Liberal lapdog media to become more balanced or fair or shut down. I have cancelled my WaPo subscription and will stop listening to WTOP. Also the WSJ is a good replacement or even a step up from the NYT. They cannot survive with only their Liberal mob and tax dollars proping them up.
And it was Obama's rhetoric that has caused this poisoned athmosphere more than anyone else's. Judge for yourself. I have a listing of his hoodlum, gangsta, criminal, bullying zingers here http://divine-ripples.blogspot.com/2011/01/obamas-responsible-for-us-culture-of.html America was not like this before he came into power.
January 10, 2011 at 4:44 pm
Tobias, getting pickles on his hamburger when he specifically ordered it without pickles could be enough to cause a psychotic person to go on a rampage.
I don't have a problem with trying to understand why he killed 6 and injured 14, but that's something best left to psychologists who take time to study and evaluate him, not the media or pop psychologists hypothesizing 2 hours after the events and before finding out any facts.
January 10, 2011 at 6:25 pm
When George Tiller was killed, I remember seeing every anti-abortion blog, site, and Facebook page post something to the effect that they disapproved of the killing, renounced violence of any kind, and made clear that the murderer had misunderstood their Pro-Life message.
The "Pro-Choice" factions, however, attacked the Pro-Lifer's for "inciting violence" by saying abortion was murder and I thought these attacks were both unfair and intellectually dishonest. The overwhelming majority of Pro-Lifers (and every one that I know personally) were just that, pro-LIFE, and were calling for an end to violence both within and outside of the womb.
But now this tragedy has happened and it looks very different to me.
I have never seen any Pro-Life literature or website showing their enemies in cross-hairs.
I have never heard a Pro-Life leader advising her followers to "reload."
Things like that make one culpable.
January 10, 2011 at 7:39 pm
Things like that make one culpable.
Sure. If you have a partisan axe to grind, and are eager to assign moral culpability to an agent that isn't even remotely responsible. Oh, and if one ignores the mountains of evidence that show that this kook had designs on the Congresswoman well before the advent of the tea party.
It's not surprising that partisan hacks are eager and willing to assign blame to people other than the shooters. Things like logic and facts won't sway them. I do find all this useful as a means of identifying people who are either intellectually dishonest or just plain stupid.
Glenn Reynolds says it all a little more succinctly.
January 10, 2011 at 7:45 pm
A provocation defense doesn't stand, because no reasonable person would be provoked to commit an act of violence by virtue of seeing "crosshairs" (in realy, a position indicator – see unicode 2316) laid over a map of the United States. Likewise, Sarah Palin saying that such-and-such a candidate is a "target" could not possibly be cause a reasonable person to kill or attempt to kill the so-called "target."
By this logic, Google should be culpable every time someone is murdered, since Google Earth uses a crosshair-like position indicator when one searches for a landmark, address, etc. I just looked up my own house, which appeared in the center of a crosshair- is Google suggesting I should be shot? Hardly.
All of that aside, just because a politician was shot does not necessarily make this politically motivated, and any attempt to politicize and capitalize on this horrific tragedy is shameful and disgusting. Anyone – democrat, republican, or otherwise – who would try to gain from this or use it against a political opponent should be ashamed of himself.
January 10, 2011 at 7:55 pm
Dutchman, I would agree with you if any of the following was the case:
1. Palin told people to shoot their opponents, as opposed to using it as a metaphor.
2. If crosshairs were not commonly used in political speech. e.g., http://j.mp/hvA1qx
3. There was any evidence that the graphic from…how long ago?…was involved in any way in causing this psychotic shooting spree.
4. There was any evidence that the murderer listened more to Limbaugh, Beck, et al, than to the voices in his head.
5. If hunting/shooting/killing metaphors were used exclusively by one party.
What happened after the shooting was not as deplorable as the shooting itself, but it's disgusting that so many people (primarily on, but not limited to, the left) were so quick to place blame on their political opponents.
January 10, 2011 at 9:47 pm
Again, I point to the CONTRAST between how Pro-Lifers reacted to the Tiller killing and how Right Wingers are reacting to this.
I know of no responsible Pro-Lifer who has ever advocated violence and they ALL denounced Scott P. Roeder.
In this case, supposedly reputable Sarah Palin has been using violent metaphors, people have been showing up armed at events where the President has been speaking, and "Tea Party" rallies have been peppered with racist banners, signs advocating violence, and Confederate flags and I have yet to hear Right Wing commentators denounce this.
Now we are treated to the spectacle of Right Wingers going "tisk tisk" as if it isn't their fault when the hate-mongering and macho posturing they have indulged in comes home to roost. How many people will respond to Sarah Palin's incitements to violence before Right denounces her as the agent provocateur she is?
January 10, 2011 at 11:33 pm
"Tea Party" rallies have been peppered with racist banners,
You're either gullible, stupid, or simply dishonest. You have bought into a narrative that is simply a lie: that of the racist "tea baggers" carrying signs and advocating violence be done. You have no proof of that, and you will offer none because none is available.
And if Sarah Palin's facebook congressional map with targets is an incitement to violence, then I suppose we ought to shut down the Target department store chain. And again, if you actually believe that there is even a remote connection between any of Palin's rhetoric and what went down, then I really just pity you.
January 11, 2011 at 12:32 am
PZ Myers did it.
January 11, 2011 at 1:01 am
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.