“The Blame Game”

From Big Journalism. Like I’ve said for some time, there are crazy people on both sides of politics.

I watched as mainstream media double-downed on yesterday’s massacre by orchestrating a massive defamation against conservatives. It made me physically ill to watch corporate reporters abuse the title of “news” in order to prostitute the dead for an agenda. It made me sad to see a litany of threats against conservatives on Twitter, Facebook, in my inbox. I was told I and other conservatives were “murderers,” that Palin should “burn in hell” that Andrew Breitbart “has blood on his hands.” I guess that isn’t considered the same “violent rhetoric” they opposed. I watched as Markos Moulitsas singled out Sarah Palin’s target map while defending the scrubbing from his own website threatening posts against Giffords by his writers.

I watched as a partisan sheriff in Pima County Arizona gave a press conference and electioneered instead of doing his job.

To have any law enforcement official reading political lines from one party is bad enough, but to do so after a shooting tragedy should be an instant sacking offense. That he thought for more than a second it would be a good idea makes him patently unfit for office.

I watched as progressives ran with the false narrative that the shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, was an Afghan veterantea party member who hated illegal immigrants. Every single word in that last sentence, except his name, is a proven lie, but many progressives discovered that they valued the opportunity to make opportunity from tragedy more than the sacredness surrounding the lives lost that day.

Indeed, once the name of the shooter became known, anyone could find out his political position. And I saw a post from a certain local blog which named the shooter but ignored all the evidence of his actual political position.

We’ve heard over and over “don’t politicize this.” I said it all day online. Andrew Breitbart wrote a post at Big Journalism before the culprit was identified imploring all to refrain from politicizing the tragedy no matter the shooter’s political identification. I watched as conservatives were attacked simply for defending themselves against the false narratives that the leftist media used to attack them.

Breitbart defends himself, peroid. Since he’s been attacked all day on a partisan basis he’s been defending himself all day on the same basis. But it’s nice to see his first response was non-partisan. His twitter feed today has been a sight to behold, the hate directed at him has been a wall of filth.

This tragedy was politicized. It was politicized by Sheriff Clarence Dupnik. It was politicized by Markos Moulitsas, MSNBC, the George Soros employees at Media Matters, and more, all who incited a wave of threats and violent atmosphere towards conservatives. I’d wager most never had to live with the amount of death threats against them or their families for speaking their minds but the people who send them to me, Palin, Breitbart, and other good conservatives too numerous to mention cite the exact same rhetoric that these irresponsible mouthpieces are pushing.

Palin posted her sympathies. The left seem to be too busy to do that for the most part.

Are they hoping for a second, dare I say quasi-political assassination? This time of conservatives?

They feel no remorse for their behavior and they don’t see the irony in faux-condemning the tragedy of yesterday while inciting hatred and violence against their political opponents.

So let’s momentarily  indulge the left and discuss rhetoric. Like this:

If you want to see just how hateful the left can be, you can follow the link and read the whole story.

That is, if you forget the Bush years.

Or you can go onto twitter and see for yourself the logic of those who want to kill all conservatives because Palin use the words “lock and load” a couple of times.


  1. To have any law enforcement official reading political lines from one party is bad enough, but to do so after a shooting tragedy should be an instant sacking offense.

    He was elected as sherrif, having run as a democrat. I would imagine that this isn’t one of the bases on which he could be impeached.

    1. Didn’t know that but it doesn’t surprise me. The fact he felt free to say something so partisan at a time so inappropriate suggests he’s safe from being sacked.

      Key would is “should”.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: