Posted on 12/24/2014 2:46:45 AM PST by servo1969
Going by objective standards of reason and fairness, Al Sharpton is not to blame for the assassination of two New York City cops over the weekend. Nor are New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama or any of the protesters and activists they supported, encouraged and allied themselves with. Going by what we know, the only person to blame is the man police identified as the killer, Ismaaiyl Brinsley.
This is the standard I've upheld in this space for years, when one madman after another has killed and maimed in the name of one cause or another. It's also been necessary to uphold this standard when madmen have killed for no political cause whatsoever, but politicians and journalists have been determined to claim otherwise.
The most glaring example of this was the horrible 2011 shooting spree in Tucson that claimed six lives and horribly wounded then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. The shooting occurred during a period of maximum liberal paranoia about the tea party movement. And in a riot of groupthink, much of the elite media convinced itself -- absent any evidence -- that the killer, Jared Loughner, was inspired by, variously, Sarah Palin's Facebook map of congressional races (there were targets over various districts where Palin wanted Democrats defeated), Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann's overheated speeches and other forms of what New York Times columnist Paul Krugman called "eliminationist rhetoric."
Indeed, Krugman's response to the Tucson shooting was indicative of this thinking. In a column titled "Climate of Hate," Krugman began: "When you heard the terrible news from Arizona, were you completely surprised? Or were you, at some level, expecting something like this atrocity to happen? Put me in the latter category."
In other words, Krugman, like countless others, had his explanation ready before the event even transpired.
This has become something of a cottage industry for some left-wing activist groups, eager to implicate their political opponents in murder. No doubt this knee-jerk reaction is often sincere. When a radical Islamic terrorist left a bomb in Times Square, then-New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg no doubt meant it when he speculated that the culprit was an opponent of Obamacare.
And some claim conservatives do the same thing when it comes to terrorist attacks from Muslims. But that strikes me as something categorically different. Radical Islamic mass murders, both attempted and successful, in recent years were done in the name of an international movement, often with material, technical or spiritual assistance from abroad.
The 2009 Fort Hood shooter was in contact with al-Qaeda and later admitted his murder rampage was on its behalf. And, unlike the tea party crowd, al-Qaeda actually uses "eliminationist rhetoric" -- and not just rhetorically.
And yet, in such cases, the knee-jerk response of the Obama administration and many liberals is to counsel the very restraint they deny to their domestic political opponents. They try to minimize the event as an "isolated incident." Amazingly, the administration designated the Fort Hood killing "workplace violence." (Congress just passed legislation, overruling the administration, that would make victims of the attack eligible for Purple Hearts).
Now we have two New York City policemen dead. The killer's postings on social media make it abundantly clear he was motivated in part by the intense furor over the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner. One of Sharpton's "Million Marchers" mobs reportedly even chanted, "What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!"
Going by the standards liberals established, Sharpton clearly has blood on his hands (for this cop-slaying and other hate crimes from his earliest days as a race hustler). And the blame hardly ends there if you go by the rules that were applied to Palin and others.
But here's the problem: Those rules stink.
Sharpton is a special case; he should have been pelted from the public stage decades ago. But it would be ridiculous to believe that De Blasio or Holder -- or Obama -- wanted this tragedy.
Double standards are seductive. If you've been demonized unfairly, it is only human to turn the tables at the first opportunity. Giving in to that temptation, however, leads to madness. Conservatives should take the high road -- and liberals should join them -- the next time a madman gives them an opportunity to take the low road.
Jonah. Man up and call a spade a spade.
This is BS. You might as well be writing for MSNVA.
______So, I think Jonah Goldberg is a little off base with this article, which can be summarized as “It’s really bad, both sides do it equally, and we have to stop on our side, even if we can’t stop them from doing it.” _______||||||||
You are 100% correct! The left is going to keep using it so why should we unilaterally disarm?
You are so right. Jonah Goldberg says that the “blame game” is ill-conceived, but this is no “game.” This is a deadly escalation of the culture war by a cadre of dangerous Cultural Marxists.
DeBlasio, the junior partner in this unholy alliance with Obama, Holder, and Sharpton, has engaged in inflammatory rhetoric that consistently agitated to these murders for many months, and now cries to “de-politicize” the situation; stand down in respect for the families of the dead officers. We are to abide by the Marquess of Queensberry rules whilst they regroup. This is a classic insurgent tactic, like when HAMAS calls for a cease fire in order re-stock their inventory of rockets.
DeBlasio, Obama, and Holder are all alumni of Columbia University, the seat of Cultural Marxism:
Obama is a devotee of Critical Race Theory, a la his “Beer Summit.”
Holder abetted the armed seizure of campus buildings and hostages.
DeBlasio was an apologist for Ortega’s Sandinista regime, made a pilgrimage to the old Soviet Union, and honeymooned in Fidel’s Havana.
Make no mistake...this is no drill. Along with their contingent street thug Al Sharpton, these men are purposeful, deliberate, revolutionary communists. They mean to use racial hatred to destroy the republic. They repeatedly lie about nearly every policy. They are truly Orwellian. I say no quarter on any front to a single one of them. It’s “kill or be killed” (figuratively Jonah?)so hoist the Black Flag and shout, “No Prisoners!”
“Sharpton WAS”
And its not Sharpton’s first offense...i.e. the seven souls who are DEAD after Freddie’s Fashion Mart was torched.
Goldberg’s ‘High Road’ gets people killed...over and over again.
“The difference is Palin and Bachmann weren’t lying about Gifford’s to get people to kill her.”
There’s another difference here...and its pretty important:
There is absolutely zero evidence to suggest that Loughner, who was a drugged out leftist loser, ever gazed upon Palin’s Facebook page or its ‘target map’.
There is no connection whatsoever between her and Loughner.
Well that too. I just figured everyone knew that. So yea, those two hurdles were jumped to blame Palin and Bachmann.
I do not think it ridiculous to believe Obama and Holder want violence against cops - they are revolutionaries and we all know a revolutionary cannot make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.