Thursday, January 20, 2011

Facebook/Twitter Ammo (Yes, We Said Ammo.)


Like many of you, I was flabbergasted by the response to the tragedy in Tucson. Yeah, we know now that about 3/4 of the country gets it – they realize the media/Left’s blame game was just so much – well, “vitriol.” But that still leaves millions of people who do NOT get it, and apparently many of them were tweeting in the hours and days after the shooting – tweeting some pretty appalling stuff:



Now, THERE’S some hate speech for you.

Some of these misguided folks may still be salvageable. They may not be buried so deeply into the leftist hate trough that they will still listen to reason. And there are others out there just like them, ignorant and sheeplike, who simply have not heard much (if any) truth on this issue. These people are probably among your friends – almost certainly somewhere among your Facebook friends. So, if you don’t step up, where are they going to hear the truth? Surely not from the (increasingly lesser) mainstream media!

Feel free to use this “rhetorical ammunition” (Heh heh!) whenever the “ever so civil” Left gets all up in your face, regurgitating the party line about “Right wing rhetoric,” hate speech, the stupidity/incarnate evil of Sarah Palin, or any one of the million other pathetic Leftist talking points currently infecting threads all over the Facebook landscape. There’s a lot here; you may want to pick and choose your favorite weapons (Heh heh!).

First up: where’s the smoking gun?



Rhetorical Bullet #10 – No connection between the shooter and politics
This seems so obvious, but apparently, there are quite a few people who absorbed enough media venom this past week or so that they actually believe there was a connection. Maybe they saw one of those first statements from Sheriff DumbHick and they are under the mistaken impression that you can trust what issues forth from the mouth of a high-ranking law enforcement official. (Although in all fairness to Arizona’s own Barney Fife, DumbHick may just be trying to distract everyone from his office’s incompetence in following up on warnings they apparently had received about Loughner.)

So the point is, the supposed Tea Party/Palin/Fox News connection has been utterly proven false since the shooting, by both those who know Jared Loughner and by his possessions (or lack thereof – he loved the Communist Manifesto, but strangely he owned no copies of Pinheads and Patriots). So tell your friends clearly – there was no connection between Loughner and Right wing politics. Or Left wing politics. Or reality.

Loughner loved the Communist Manifesto, yes, but he also loved staring into space, acting super creepy, and visiting one of Representative Giffords’ 2007 events to ask her “what is government if words have no meaning.” He did that back in the day, before the Tea Party or Sarah Palin were nationally known. See how that works? It’s called a timeline, and it disproves just about every theory the media/Left floated since about 15 minutes after bullets flew.

Why do people go crazy? Well, dabbling in devil worship seems to be a contributing factor.

Which leads me to the core of the reason he did what he did: Evil. He apparently played around with the idea of evil, and eventually he became evil, which led to extreme evil perpetrated on innocent victims.

Ah, but why did he become evil? We may speculate – what kind of life did he live, growing up? What were his parents like? We don’t have a lot of those answers at this point, but we do know one thing he was exposed to… high school curriculum from the mind of unrepentant American terrorist Bill Ayers (another guy just like Loughner – doesn’t like America, wants to destroy things, loves the Communist Manifesto). Ayers has been an “educator” for years, funded in part by his buddy Barry Obama, who Ayers recruited to run a foundation paying for this Leftist educational experiment. So basically, it’s really Obama’s fault!

Not really, of course. But imagine, for a moment, if Loughner had spent a couple years ingesting some Christian homeschool curriculum and then this happened. The media/Left would have imploded, no? (Now there’s a mental image! Take a moment to savor and enjoy.) Oops, did I just lower the rhetorical tone?
SORRY.

Anyway, the truth is, Obama’s fingerprints do actually show up on this crime, albeit in a remote and tangential way – still, that’s a whole lot more than we can say about any involvement of Sarah Palin. After all, she’s not the one who pushed a curriculum that was force-fed to this young man for several years.

One of the victims is now blaming the Right, and has been arrested for threatening the local Tea Partiers. Well, this was inevitable, as Giffords would no doubt draw left-leaners to her event, and it was only a matter of time before one of them tried to capitalize on his/her own misfortune to try to score political points. Most of America, hopefully, still won’t bite.

Next: How the media glossed over the heart of the story…



Rhetorical Bullet #9 – The media/Left were so busy hating on the Right, they missed important parts of the story

Well, they didn’t completely miss them. But these are the HUMAN points that got buried in all the leftist vitriol:

*U.S. District Court Judge John Roll, the federal judge killed by virtue of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, was appointed by President Bush (the elder) and enjoyed the respect of many all along the political spectrum. It is believed that he stopped to greet Giffords on his way home from church. Attending Mass was a daily occurrence for the judge. (I do hope he’s enjoying the company of His Maker right now.)

*Three of the dead were senior citizens, and one of them died a hero’s death. Dorwan Stoddard, 76, threw himself over his wife when the shooting started. She was hit, but will survive – because Dorwan’s body absorbed the hail of bullets aimed their way.

*Senior citizens were actually the heroes of the day. When Loughner’s second clip malfunctioned, there bystanders took the opportunity to subdue him. Three bystanders aged 61, 74 and (female) 61.

*A younger man, Joe Zamudio, ran over to help. He’d been in a nearby store, and ran toward the trouble thinking he might be able to help. He was armed with his gun, but realized he didn’t need to use it by the time he got there. Hours later, when MSNBC bigmouth Ed Schultz tried to use Zamudio to prop up gun control during an interview, Zamudio set him straight:



“You would have used your gun? You’re damn right.”
*And… this is a clip that didn’t get a lot of air time, considering that NBC interviewer Meredith Vieira was busy casting aspersions on pretty much the entire GOP last week. But at one point, she spoke with the father of 9-year-old victim Christina Green.

Watch with your Kleenex box handy. And marvel at this man’s strength of character in defending our freedom:



Next: I’ve seen hate speech, and this is no hate speech…


Rhetorical Bullet #8 – What the Right has been saying is not hate

Bluntly put, expressing a desire for limited government is not “hate.” Voting for candidates who wish to curb federal spending is not “hate.” Wanting to secure our borders is not “hate.” Heck, even being pro-life is not “hate”! But you wouldn’t know that from watching media coverage of this unfold after the shooting.

Let’s take a quick look at the flashpoint for the terribly misplaced ire of the Left. As we all know,leftists almost all suffer from Palin Derangement Syndrome and fear her powerful gun-totin’ womanhood. She can fell a caribou! She says things like “lock and load”! But WORST of all… the infamous Palin map!



Look at that! She put gun sights – cross hairs – over Giffords’ district!

GUILTY. Case closed.

Well, as Neal Boortz points out… not so fast, my friend. Click here to see how Democrats like to TARGET their ENEMIES with things like BULL’S-EYES.

Now again – nobody’s saying it’s wrong to use military imagery in an election. That’s where we got the word “campaign”! But we are saying that the Left is full of hypocritical douches who apparently have no qualms about demonizing political opponents – for doing almost exactly the same thing they do themselves on a regular basis.

Next: And speaking of hypocritical douches…


Rhetorical Bullet #7 – Civil discourse is best served from the Left

Now, listen up, you dumb redneck gun- and Bible-clingers. We on the Left will now demonstrate civility. Pay attention.

Here’s how you talk about your political opponents – you suggest they be put against a wall and shot (and note the gentle tone used by the reporter in sharing these warm thoughts).

Or, you simply imply they’re drooling idiots.

Here’s how you show respect to a president – you compare him to Hitler in the most offensive ways possible.

Or, proudly proclaim your profound hatred for him, in print.

Here’s how you act if you win the presidency based in part on promises to act in a bipartisan fashion – you tell the other side, basically, to get bent

Here’s how you act after you’ve been president for awhile and things aren’t going your way – you attack your opponents using inflammatory (what?) language, and take potshots at your own side for good measure.

Here’s your idea of a good joke – laughing about imagining your opponents… dead (bonus points if you do this while living in the White House).

Had about all the civility you can stomach? Because it gets worse than this. Larry Elder did a great job of corralling a number of the most offensive Leftist “hate” examples

But Michelle Malkin produced an absolute tour-de-force. (As she notes, they were asking for it.) Grab a cup of coffee (or maybe a big glass of wine) and enjoy this.

Next: Ah, but the Left does more than TALK – they are people of ACTION (read: violence)…


Rhetorical Bullet #6 – For all their flower child talk, leftists have a rich history of violence…

Do they ever! We on the Right are HOPELESSLY behind on this one. Let us again learn from our betters, with just a few examples. Over at American Thinker, they recently took a trip down memory lane:
“Who can forget Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam? Or Eldridge ‘rape is an insurrectionary act’ Cleaver and his Black Panthers? What about the bombings perpetrated by the Weathermen? Former Weatherman bomber Bill Ayers is, of course, a close associate of President Barack Obama. Ayers managed to escape prosecution (and proclaimed himself ‘[g]uilty as hell, free as a bird’), but his wife Bernadine Dohrn served jail time for her part in the violence. Black radicals seized Cornell University at gunpoint in 1969, the same year the SDS and the Weathermen staged the ‘Days of Rage’ riots. Race riots took place in Watts in 1965 and nationwide in 1968; leftists rioted at the Democratic Party Convention in Chicago in 1968. John Kennedy was murdered by a communist, and Robert Kennedy was shot by a Palestinian — hardly men of the right. The 1970s weren’t much calmer. The Army Math Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison was bombed by leftist radicals in 1970. Heiress Patty Hearst was kidnapped and took part in a series of armed bank robberies by the left-wing Symbionese Liberation Army. The SLA inspired Sarah Jane Moore to try to assassinate Gerald Ford — less than three weeks after Lynette ‘Squeaky’ Fromme, a disciple of Charles Manson, tried to kill Ford also. And what about the shooting of FBI agents at Wounded Knee by the American Indian Movement in 1975? Since we’re taking about violence against members of Congress, how can we possibly fail to mention the murder of Congressman Leo Ryan and the mass suicide of nine hundred people by the leftist/Marxist Jonestown cult in 1978? Does anyone recall that President Clinton pardoned members of the Marxist-Leninist-inspired Puerto Rican terrorist group FALN? Clinton also pardoned left-wing radical Susan Rosenberg, who was imprisoned for her role in the murder of two police officers and a security guard in a robbery in 1981. She was offered a teaching job at Hamilton College, but public outcry forced her to decline the position. More recently, we’ve seen anarchist and communist riots against the WTO in Seattle in 1999, and violent anti-Bush and antiwar protests.”
Indeed.

This seems like a good place to insert one Richard Trumka, current head of the AFL/CIO. He is, needless to say, alarmed about violent speech in light of the shooting. But actual violence, apparently, doesn’t bother him so much (warning: this story includes a dead animal head, as all good union/mafia stories must).

This also seems like a good place to remind everyone that the nutjob who opened fire, recently, at a Florida school board meeting… well, he actually DID have a bunch of leftist stuff on his Facebook page, etc. What? You don’t recall the media mentioning that? Yeah… me neither. That’s odd. Anyway, Glenn Beck mentioned it – and then went on to emphasize that the responsibility belonged to the shooter alone. Proving the Beck has more class in one of his toenail clippings than pretty much all the MSM combined.

Finally, as was almost inevitable from the torrential outpouring of misplaced hatred, we now have death threats against innocent people who simply wanted to take a stronger hand in their own civic life.

Next: Mental illness epidemic (see Wing, Left)…


Rhetorical Bullet #5 – Jared Loughner not the only one who’s a little bit crazy…

Anytime someone accuses you of what they themselves are doing, it does bring their grasp of reality into question, no? Since the last few pages of this post have already made my point, I rest my case.

But just for fun, let’s hear from dimwit Mark Halperin, who simply cannot figure out why the Right won’t “unite the country” by ignoring the collective blood libel against all of us.

Hahaha! You just cannot make this stuff up!

Next: Is it hateful to lie?


Rhetorical Bullet #4 – When they couldn’t twist the truth any harder, they outright lied

The Left is so far wrong on so many things, they often find they have to resort to that tried-and-true (and Saul Alinsky-approved) technique of LYING in order to obtain or maintain support for their delusional ideas. The Arizona shooting provided no motivation for them to alter course. A few examples should suffice:

Former Senator Bob Kerrey decides, with exactly ZERO evidence, that the shooter was probably upset about the attempt to repeal Obamacare.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, fully invested in this administration’s “kiss up to the Arabs” strategy, tells the United Arab Emirates that their extremists (i.e. the folks who brought us 9/11) are pretty much the same as “our extremists” (i.e. Jared Loughner). In other words, she legitimized Loughner’s insanity as just an extreme version of a political viewpoint – and we all know, of course, which political viewpoint she was tagging on him. And that, again as has been proven far beyond the shadow of a doubt, is a lie.

I find it particularly reprehensible when people use their children to smear others, and so I’m going to include this next one in the lying category, simply because I don’t believe this exchange took place. I don’t know how old her children are, but the exchange reported to CBS by leftist Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz just does not ring true:
“After my daughter heard that, you know, Gabby had been shot, the first thing she asked me was, you know, ‘Mommy, are you going to get shot? Does that mean youre going to get shot?’ And then I, you know, did my best to reassure her, tell her, ‘No, you know, Mommy takes precautions. You’ve been to my meetings. You know we have, we take steps to make sure that we’re all safe.’ But then the next thing she said to me was – and this is where you don’t realize how closely they’re watching – ‘But Mommy, Florida’s going to pass an immigration law like Arizona and then people are going to be mad at you.’ You know, they’re paying attention. The civil discourse is very important because it’s not just – it’s not just adults that – that this permeates. It’s our children.”
Did you get that? It PERMEATES our children. Well then, by all means, let’s just open up the borders and let the entire Mexican population in right now! Nothing could be worse, after all, than permeated kids.
“But Mommy, Florida’s going to pass an immigration law like Arizona…” Isn’t Schultz’ little daughter a genius, with that solid grasp of immigration policy nuances in various states? I’m sure the kid said exactly that, just like mom reported. Yeah.

While we’re on the subject of bigmouthed leftist broads who can’t keep their nose out of other people’s business, Michelle Obama! Here’s why she’s a liar – because she says the lesson from Tucson is to teach your children the value of tolerance and giving others the benefit of the doubt, particularly if you disagree with them.

Really? That’s the takeaway here? As writer Ann Althouse notes, shouldn’t we tell our kids that we need to be aware of the individuals around us, some of whom might need a whole lot more than “tolerance and wishful thinking about how good they might be?”

Just for grins, look at this whopper that the Queen suggests we teach our kiddies:
“We can explain to (the children) that although we might not always agree with those who represent us, anyone who enters public life does so because they love their country and want to serve it.”
Now there’s a whopper, and a darn self-serving one, at that.

Next: Climbing over the corpses to further the cause…


Rhetorical Bullet #3 – True to its policy, the Left did not waste this crisis

It has been fairly well reported, but only across the blogosphere, that a Democratic operative counseled Obama to “deftly pin this on the Tea Partiers, just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.” To his credit, Obama did not go there in his speech. But, so what? He stood by quietly for almost a week and let every other Democrat in America do his dirty work for him.

Others who jumped on the “profit from tragedy” bandwagon include socialist Representative Bernie Sanders, who sent out a FUNDRAISING letter with this quaint verbiage:
“This horrendous act of violence is not some kind of strange aberration for this area where, it appears, threats and acts of violence are part of the political climate… nobody can honestly express surprise that such a tragedy finally occurred.”
Yes, it’s an everyday occurrence in Tucson, no doubt. That’s why there was no media coverage.
Sheesh!

Of course, it was kind of an everyday occurrence for Olbermann, because he uses EVERYTHING to bash the Right. This one had him pronouncing from on high that Palin must be dismissed from politics. First it was because she caused it all, then it was because she was hiding and too scared to come out and defend herself, and then it was because she came out and defended herself, and BLOOD LIBEL BLOOD LIBEL BLOOD LIBEL! Speaking of blood, his blood pressure must be sky-freaking-high. (I’m not providing links because I’m sure you’re sick of even looking at him.)

Of course the ultimate leftist misuse of this crisis wasn’t simply to blame the Tea Party, or raise money for crazed socialists, or even to bash Palin. It is something more overarching, and more evil. It is the attempt to SHUT US UP. This entire blame game is all about silencing the people who have been winning in the marketplace of ideas. And that makes the irony of their hateful words particularly rich, as writer Bill Murchison points out:
“They poison the very well they claim to be unclogging.”

Next: What’s at stake if we are silenced…


Rhetorical Bullet #2 – It’s called FREE SPEECH for a reason

After the raw fact of human beings mowed down and injured by a madman, the second most chilling thing to emerge from all this is the sentiment – on anyone’s part – that we somehow must curtail free speech. The fact that political speech did not play a role in this killing is almost irrelevant, since the Left has insisted on making it an issue anyway. So let’s address it. What if Loughner had been a Tea Partier? What if his library was filled with books by Limbaugh, Beck, O’Reilly and Hannity? What if he had voted for Bristol Palin 64,927 times during Dancing With the Stars?

It still wouldn’t – and certainly shouldn’t – change anything. Our freedom to discuss the issues of the day is among the most precious freedoms we have. People have literally died (not this time, but plenty of other places) in order to protect those rights. They are dear; they are precious. They are not affected by a madman who chooses his own course.

And that is pretty much the same thing we’d say if the shooter was an Olbermann fan. As unhinged as Olby can be, he has the right to rant on. But no matter what he says – even if he says that someone should be dead (and I think he has said that) – that does not license anyone to go out and harm anyone else. See, it’s really pretty simple.

The media could really help reinforce this simple message. But they’ve got other things on their little minds…

Next: The Left’s best friend in any crisis…


Rhetorical Bullet #1 – The media can always be counted on to spew the (leftist) party line

As a trained journalist with a longtime interest in the news business and a previous career in a big city newsroom, I must say that I cannot remember being more appalled with the state of reporting in this country than I have been this past week.

In some cases, they acted as little more than leftist cheerleaders, like Jonathan Alter of the now-pathetic Newsweek, asking “Can Obama Turn Tragedy Into Triumph?

Yup, that was definitely the first question that popped into my mind after I heard about the shooting. As it should have been the first question in all of our minds; the wellbeing of the Anointed One should be our highest priority, no? Alter’s the one who also helpfully pointed out that Gabby Giffords was more valuable to Obama alive than dead. (Whew! Lucky for her that didn’t go the other way!)

Without exception, the mainstream media players lined up in mind-numbing, predictable lockstep, like they always do. Of course the New York Times droned on about the “climate of hate” (Paul Krugman),  while CBS News looked forward to note that the GOP “sideshow” of Obamacare repeal would be a test of civility (apparently it would be a lot more civil to just let Obamacare bankrupt the country – we conservatives have SO much to learn about being nice).

In the “up is down” category, the editor of the New Yorker tried to argue that Obama’s early attempts to freeze out Fox News were actually shining examples of civil discourse. Uh… huh?

Over at ABC, reporter Claire Shipman snarked that Palin’s speech was something that was “meant to be statesman like” – but then again, Claire is even more in bed with the Obama Administration than most reporters, and I mean literally IN BED. Her husband is rumored to be a possible replacement for White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. Well, she certainly did her part this week to get in good with hubby’s potential new boss! ABC also snidely reported that in releasing her speech, Palin had found a way to insert herself into the story. Yeah! Nobody else had even MENTIONED Sarah Palin before she released that video speech and just pushed herself right into the middle of the issue!

As for NBC and their retarded little brother, MSNBC… well, no surprises. Andrea Mitchell dredged up a 2005 Glenn Beck quote to prove Right wing hatred (2005, Andrea? That’s six years ago! Surely we’ve been hateful since then?!)… she also apparently could find absolutely no examples from the MSNBC video vault that demonstrated similar sentiment on the Left. Hmmm. If she can’t find any examples on MSNBC, methinks she isn’t watching. Ever. Because there’s a new example approximately every 30 seconds. Anyway, Andrea must like MSNBC even if she never watches it, because quoted a poll from msnbc.com to prove that a majority of people disagreed with Palin on something or other; it doesn’t matter what. What matters is, she quoted a poll from msnbc.com! You gotta admit, that’s hilarious. Nearly 59% didn’t like Palin, which means that of the three people reading that site, two agree with Andrea Mitchell.

Of course we can’t leave NPR out of our little circle tour of the media. They asked a Latina to share how relieved she was that a white boy killed the folks, not a brown boy. These are the people who fired Juan Williams for “insensitive” racially-based comments. Okay!

It goes on and on and nauseatingly on. Premier leftist website the Daily Kos tried to argue that Palin removing her infamous map from her website was proof of guilt – of what, we’re not sure. The irony is that after Giffords voted against Pelosi not more than two weeks ago, Kos had made comments  about Giffords (“she’s DEAD to me”) that he scrubbed from HIS site after the shooting (and after tweeting a stream of profanity-laced hatred directed at Palin). But like we said, that’s different. Why? I don’t know. But it’s different.

Media Matters‘ Eric Boehlert completely lost it when Andrew Breitbart’s site ran a livestream of CNN coverage of the shooting. Boehlert implied that the livestream was “proof” that Breitbart approved of the violence.

Look! That rightwing pig Breitbart is showing the violence because he loves it! (Well, why is CNN showing it?) I told you! That’s different!

The utter failure of the mainstream media to report, in a fair and relatively unbiased fashion, the events of the day – well, quite frankly this failure is a threat to our democratic republic. But that failure also means that, unlike you, the well-informed NewsReal Blog reader! – your non-conservative friends haven’t heard most of this information. So bookmark this little compendium, and over the weeks to come, when someone tries to tell you what the shooting was all about, you can come back and pick up your weapon (Heh heh!) of choice… and just maybe blow a few little minds.

Rhetorically speaking, of course.

No comments:

Post a Comment