Free Markets, Free People

Giffords shooting prompts proposed limits to freedom and hypocritical recriminations

Well, as you can imagine, the Giffords shooting has sucked all the oxygen out of just about every other subject. And, as you can probably further imagine, the "let’s make a law" crowd is busily at work trying to again limit our freedoms in the name of "security".

We have a representative from PA who wants to outlaw "crosshairs" in political advertising. I have to wonder what part of "Congress shall make no law" in the 1st Amendment and political speech he doesn’t understand? Perhaps the word "no" as in none, zip, zero, nada?

The typical overreaction is underway.   As is the inevitable.  Gun control pops its ugly head up again as a New York Congresswoman prepares to introduce legislation banning high-capacity ammunition clips. 

And then there’s Paul Krugman.  The historically blind and deaf Paul Krugman.  Check out these opening two paragraphs in a piece entitled “Climate of Hate”:

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. I’ve had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach ever since the final stages of the 2008 campaign. I remembered the upsurge in political hatred after Bill Clinton’s election in 1992 — an upsurge that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. And you could see, just by watching the crowds at McCain-Palin rallies, that it was ready to happen again. The Department of Homeland Security reached the same conclusion: in April 2009 an internal report warned that right-wing extremism was on the rise, with a growing potential for violence.

Notice anything missing in his trip down memory lane?  Yeah, 8 years of inflammatory rhetoric and what he now labels as “hate” directed at George Bush and the right.  I’m sure you’re not surprised – this sort of memory loss is endemic on the left.  The memory hole, which they seem unable to acknowledge, is why most on the right take the likes of Paul Krugman and their hate claims with the grain of salt they deserve.  When their rhetoric was pointed out to them, their retort was “dissention is patriotism”.

Note too that the economist turned political hack continues to insist, in the face of almost conclusive evidence to the contrary, that the violence visited on Rep. Giffords was the result of the “hatred” from the right.  And he uses the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center’s report (hidden in the just as discredited Homeland Security report) as “proof” of his claims.

Krugman must have sensed he’s on thin ice because a few paragraphs in he throws this out:

It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.

Holy Mars and Venus, Batman – is this guy living on the same planet we’re living on?  Of course it can be an “isolated event” and it certainly can have nothing to do with the so-called “national climate”.  The guy was a loon.  A nutcase.  He has serious mental problems.  He’s a yahoo who became fixated on Rep. Giffords for no apparent logical reason other than she was a local politician.  Trying to warp this into something it isn’t, however, is suddenly becoming the pastime of the left.  Well, much of it anyway (there are indeed islands of sanity out there, but they’re becoming less prevalent).

Krugman then attempts to whitewash the left’s very recent past by claiming you’ll mostly hear only caustic remarks and mocking at worst. Michelle Malkin neatly disposes of that myth.

He concludes:

So will the Arizona massacre make our discourse less toxic? It’s really up to G.O.P. leaders. Will they accept the reality of what’s happening to America, and take a stand against eliminationist rhetoric? Or will they try to dismiss the massacre as the mere act of a deranged individual, and go on as before?

If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.

What then, as evidence continues to mount supporting it, if it was indeed a “mere act of a deranged individual” Mr. Krugman.  Will we get an Emily Litella like “never mind” from you?

This is the latest in a long line of efforts by the left to shut its opposition up.  Political correctness has finally begun to wear thin as most have now recognized it for what it is – an attempt to control speech.  This effort is nothing less than that.  It is the claim that speech must be modified because others who are deranged might act on it, even out of context. But that lack of memory about their own toxic speech and their spirited defense of it (again, see Malkin’s listing of the left’s happy talk about George Bush) smacks of such hypocrisy that the word is almost insufficient to define them at this point.

Freedom and democracy demand risk to work.  They must not be held prisoner to speech codes and “security”.  We must not let the priorities that underpin freedom be chipped away or removed by a bunch of scared rabbits.  If Congress wants to beef up security around its members, I can understand that.  However, that’s as far as I’m willing to go.  Restricting the freedoms of the rest of us because of some nut is just flat unacceptable.

And by the way, Mr. Krugman – go see a doctor.  I’m told the  type of memory loss you’re suffering is the first sign of senile dementia.  Have it checked out, will you?



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

36 Responses to Giffords shooting prompts proposed limits to freedom and hypocritical recriminations

  • If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.

    >>>> Somehow, I no longer care.

    I wonder why that would be?

  • If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.

    >>>> Somehow, I no longer care.

    I wonder why that would be?

  • “I’ve had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach ”

    I suggest Maalox.

    Has anyone wondered why his parents, the people who should know him best and with whom he lived, do not seem to have been mentioned?  Shouldn’t they have some responsibility ?  After all, since he is now on their health insurance until the age of 26 and with new mental health benefits it wouldn’t cost them anything.

    Are they, perhaps, even nuttier and even more of a threat? I bet they watch Fox News 24/7.

    Then again, since it takes a village I guess we are all responsible, the realization of which probably causes that feeling in Paul Krugman’s pit. 

  • I think the reason he did it was mainly to just promote chaos. He wanted the media to freak out about this whole thing. He wanted exactly what’s happening. He wants all of that.”

    Sounds just like Krugman. Perhaps it’s not an isolated incident.

  • And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will.

    I don’t listen to any of these folks regularly, but “shooting government officials or beheading a journalist” ?
    I demand that Krugman give citations. I bet he has never watched them, just got second-hand BS from his friends.
    I suggest new friends.

    • Yeah, I’m pretty sure neither one made those type of statements.  But hey, why let truth get in the way of the narrative?

  • “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,”
    “Punish your enemies”
    Did I miss any?

    • “Get in their faces”

    • “They [the opposition] are like suicide bombers…”

    • You missed the one where, if this fellow had been an Al’Qaeda operative and blown himself up and murdered several people, we would be awash in lectures asking us not to use the incident to tar all Muslim people with the same brush.  But because he’s an anti-government loon, it’s okay to tar every conservative as supporting the hateful invective that surely drove this poor man to kill.

    • “…we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill.”

  • Loughner is a schizophrenic. That’s about the entire story here. Most schizophrenics, if they are dangerous, are mainly dangerous to themselves. Then you get a case like this, where they guy evolves into a mass murderer. It has nothing to do with politics, and the fact that the target was a Congresswoman does not change that. It could just as easily have been a media personality, or some administrator at the college Loughner was tossed from.  As for Krugman, he has long been a beady-eyed hysteric. What qualified him to write a political column for the Times? He doesn’t seem to know very much at all about politics.

    • Perhaps those spewing about this incident are somewhat sympathetic to Loughner in that they share that disorder?

      • The first time I saw Krugman (without at first knowing who he was) on the longtime TV program Open Mind my first impression was of a fevered Leftist who was very “psychological,” to put it mildly. I fortunately stopped reading the Times op-ed page long before he arrived there, so I wasn’t familiar with him. When he was identified on the program I was a little taken aback. But he definitely left me with an impression.

  • Whether it be Charles Whitman, Charles Manson, Susan Smith or others, the suffering always seems to fall on the victims,their families and friends, and even society as a whole.

    Why is it that we have to suffer for the jackassery of terrorists ?
    I suggest a “teaching moment” for terroists like Laughner .. make him suffer

  • The guy was a loon.  A nutcase.  He has serious mental problems.

    I wasn’t sure it you meant Krugman or the killer…

    • I think he meant both.

      • Heh.  Both apply…
        I think that “sick feeling” really emanates from the pit of Krugman’s skull.  That would explain his love of objectively failed economic policy…among MANY other signs of insanity.

  • It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.

    Leave it to Moonbat Krugman to make this about Warm-mongering…!!!

    • While a small number of defendants have previously sought, without success, to use Wynn Miller’s methods to defend themselves against tax avoidance charges, he has until now remained largely unknown outside of far-right US circles. His name was connected to the Loughner inquiry when an official from the Southern Poverty Law Centre, which monitors extremist groups, told US television that it seemed Loughner had been “getting some of his key ideas from David Wynn Miller”.
      Wynn Miller claims to have 1 billion adherents worldwide. In interviews he agreed that he and Loughner shared beliefs on grammar and that it was possible that the latter had read his website. But he dismissed as “ridiculous” the idea that this could have inspired the mass shooting. There is no evidence thus far that Loughner knew of Wynn Miller or his beliefs.

      More vitriol coming from the Southern Poverty Law Centre

  • Note the emphasis is in the original…

    Such a brutal and violent attack on an individual who has devoted herself to public service is deeply regrettable. It calls upon us as an academic community to stop and ponder the climate in which such an act can be contemplated, even by a mind that is profoundly disturbed. A climate in which demonization of others goes unchallenged and hateful speech is tolerated can lead to such a tragedy. I believe that it is not a coincidence that this tragedy has occurred in a state which has legislated discrimination against undocumented persons. This same mean-spirited xenophobia played a major role in the defeat of the Dream Act by our legislators in Washington, leaving many exceptionally talented and deserving young people, including our own undocumented students, painfully in limbo with regard to their futures in this country.
    On our own campus, and throughout all the campuses of the University of California, we must continue to work toward a climate of equity and inclusion for all. We must be vigilant to condemn hate speech and acts of vandalism on our campuses by those wanting to promote enmity. We must work to support dialogue about our differences and eschew expressions of demonization of others,including virulent attacks on Israel, anti-Muslim graffiti, racism towards African-Americans, Chicano/Latinos and other underrepresented minority groups, and homophobic acts. Continuing to support our principles of community will ensure a better and safer campus. We must do this now so that our students, as future leaders of this great country, will continue to set the standard for a better and safer nation.

    Robert J. Birgeneau
    Chancellor, UC Berkeley

  • <rant>
    “…introduce legislation banning high-capacity ammunition clips” Arg!!! It’s magazines, not clips! You use clips to load magazines.
    I know that it takes a certain, shall we say, “personality disorder” to be a politician but can we at least establish a minimum IQ?

  • How about minimum IQ to be a sherriff?  Because it looks like that loudmouth piece of trash absolutely just ignored this loon making death threats.  Kinda dropped the ball there sparky.  If I was you I’d be looking for scapegoats also.

    So yeah, it MUST be Palins’ fault.

    • I think Sheriff Dupe-dick will be looking for work, come the next election…

      • Now it’s Limbaugh’s fault according to him.

        I think he needs to be forced out.  Based on his comments I have to wonder if anyone on the right can get equal treatment under his law… 

        • Well, he infamously declared he would not enforce the new immigration law months ago.
          That kinda shoots his oath of office in the head.  (OMG, did I just incite violence…!!!???)

  • This McCarthyism of the left – devoid of intellectual content, unsupported by data – is a mental tic, not an idea but a tactic for avoiding engagement with ideas. It expresses limitless contempt for the American people, who have reciprocated by reducing liberalism to its current characteristics of electoral weakness and bad sociology.

  • If it’s hatred from the right that the left really wants, it seems to me that all they have to do is keep it up: people get really sick and tired of being called terrorists and murderers just because they happen to hold opinions that contravene liberal orthodoxy, and that can turn into real hatred if it becomes apparent that the left will start actively curtailing civil rights in the interests of fighting that “hatred”.

    How pathetic is it that several people, including a little girl, are dead and several others are gravely injured yet we are arguing with each other about who is to blame?  That isn’t the fault of those on the right: the left started blaming us practically before the gunsmoke cleared.  AND THEY DID IT AND CONTINUE TO DO IT DELIBERATELY FOR POLITICAL GAIN.

  • How pathetic is it that several people, including a little girl, are dead and several others are gravely injured yet we are arguing with each other about who is to blame?

    >>>  Except WE’RE not arguing about who is to blame.

    THEY’RE trying to score ghoulish political points and shut us up.
    WE’RE trying to fight off a blood libel.


  • Giffords shooting prompts proposed limits to freedom and hypocritical recriminations FYI I attempted your rss feed link and it didnt work. I will try once more in a couple of hours.