Monday, January 10, 2011

My Stupid, Moronic, Idiotic, Lying, Grandstanding...

Back stabbing, Race baiting, representative, Jim Clyburn, is jumping on the Democratic-fueled baseless claim that political rhetoric was to blame in the recent tragic shooting in Tucson, Arizona. Bear in mind, there is ZERO evidence to support the instantaneous claim that Sarah Palin and the Tea Party were to blame for this attack against the well respected and well regarded Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords.

Why all of the name calling? Because if my "esteemed" (cough, choke) Congressman has his way, we will lose our right to free speech, so I figure I better get it all out now. Ahem. Yessiree, he thinks we need to have some "parameters" set forth, as this Post and Courier article makes clear:
U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in Congress, said Sunday the deadly shooting in Arizona should get the country thinking about what's acceptable to say publicly and when people should keep their mouths shut.

Clyburn said he thinks vitriol in public discourse led to a 22-year-old suspect opening fire Saturday at an event Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords held for her constituents in Tucson, Ariz. Six people were killed and 14 others were injured, including Giffords.

The shooting is cause for the country to rethink parameters on free speech, Clyburn said from his office, just blocks from the South Carolina Statehouse. He wants standards put in place to guarantee balanced media coverage with a reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, in addition to calling on elected officials and media pundits to use 'better judgment.'

'Free speech is as free speech does,' he said. 'You cannot yell ‘fire' in a crowded theater and call it free speech and some of what I hear, and is being called free speech, is worse than that.'

Clyburn used as an example a comment made by Sharron Angle, an unsuccessful U.S. senatorial candidate in Nevada, who said the frustrated public may consider turning to 'Second Amendment remedies' for political disputes unless Congress changed course.

Clyburn said the man accused of shooting Giffords did just that.

'He saw a Second Amendment remedy and that's what occurred here and there is no way not to make that connection,' Clyburn said. [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest, and some of the comments are pretty good, especially the one from "Superrog" who suggests to Clyburn, "Bite me.".)

From where did this claim originate? Well, according to Politico, from a Democratic operative:
[snip]One veteran Democratic operative, who blames overheated rhetoric for the shooting, said President Barack Obama should carefully but forcefully do what his predecessor did.

“They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”

Another Democratic strategist said the similarity is that Tucson and Oklahoma City both “take place in a climate of bitter and virulent rhetoric against the government and Democrats.” [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

With absolutely zero evidence, the Democrats endeavored, and have been fully assisted by the media, in propagating a complete fallacy about the actions of this madman in Tucson. They are, in essence, engaging in the very "virulent rhetoric" of which they are accusing Republicans and Tea Partiers. They don't seem to see the irony - make that hypocrisy - of their actions. Or if they do, they just don't care. And Clyburn with his race-baiting of the Clintons is particularly guilty of political rhetoric, oh hell - let's call it what it was - a LIE, that had major consequences.

Indeed, these claims were made essentially from the outset, as Sheriff Paul Babeu makes clear in the following clip:



And why? Why would a sheriff make such an absurd claim about the motive? Why did the left seize on this tragic horrible situation in which six American citizens were gunned down, and fourteen others, including a US Congresswoman, were seriously injured? What in the world could be the logic here? Just to gain a political edge? Could they really be that callous, that repugnant, to use the deaths and grave injuries of others just to punish their political enemies?

It sure seems that way, especially considering the restraint many on the Left called for after Major Hasan opened fire on a number of his fellow soldiers, as Ed Morrissey wrote about this weekend. We were told not to assume it was because he was Muslim, that we didn't know what was going on, all of the facts were not in, etc., etc. Well, turns out it WAS because he is Muslim, but yes, restraint until the facts are known is solid advice. It is a shame they were so quick to (incorrectly) judge this time around. But, wow, were they ever, including Paul Krugman of the New York Times:



Wow. Krugman has no idea who Loughner is, but that doesn't stop him from making these wild accusations. The entire media has been a willing partner in putting forth this propaganda as to rationale for the shooting. How else can you classify it as anything other than propaganda? The print media, bloggers, and television networks have been all too willing to CREATE this rumor, and put it forth as fact, though everything that is coming out NOW clearly demonstrates how false their meme is.

That the Democrats, including my assholic representative, Jim Clyburn, and their willing accomplices, the media, are choosing to use this tragedy for political gain is simply obscene. It is callous, it is the absolute worst kind of grandstanding, and it is reprehensible. They should be ashamed of themselves, though I doubt that emotion can even filter through the sanctimony and political opportunism they are demonstrating repeatedly over this tragedy.

The focus should be on how this clearly deranged man passed his FBI background check, why his repeated death threats were not taken more seriously, and how the system failed, not trying to blame a group who had absolutely nothing to do with this heinous crime.

Moreover, we should concern ourselves with those fighting for their lives, and for the families of those fallen as a result of Loughner's actions. That would be the appropriate response, not trying to curb our speech, or make up blame to heap on others, thus fueling the very vitriol that is being decried.

The Democrats, and the media, are way out of line on this one, and they need to rectify this situation immediately. They can begin with an apology to Sarah Palin, and maybe, just maybe instead of spouting off with nothing more than lies, rumor, and innuendo, they can just shut the hell up already. Talking to you, Rep. Clyburn.

4 comments:

Amarissa said...

Very well said! Thank you!

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

Thanks, Amarissa! (Gorgeous cat!)

janiscortese said...

No biggie, Amy. PEOPLE won't lose their right to free speech, just ladies. And only when they posture to counteract a vicious, earthshattering tidal wave of violent death threats directed to them and their families.

Seriously. The "murk that cunt" and "rape by big black homies" stuff wasn't to blame for a political culture of violence. Palin's refusal to fold like a cheap card table under it was! Jeez, don't you know anything?

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

Janis, thank you - I stand corrected. I shoulda known it was just 'cause the wimmin-folk were getting uppity...

:-)