Don't do wrong in order to look righteous

Updated 1/12/11
"(CNN) -- The U.S. House of Representatives will vote on a resolution Wednesday condemning the "horrific" Arizona shooting rampage, as President Barack Obama prepares to attend a memorial for victims of the attack.
The proposed resolution lists the names of the six victims killed in the Saturday shooting and states that the House of Representatives "stands firm in its belief in a democracy in which all can participate and in which intimidation and threats of violence cannot silence the voices of any American." (emphasis mine)

By passing the proposed resolution, the U.S. House is in effect declaring that the tragic shooting in Arizona was indeed politically motivated. In an effort to look caring, the U.S. House is playing right into the hands of the Liberal Left. A resolution of sympathy would have been in order, as well as one of condemning the senseless act, but when they include the phrase "intimidation and threats of violence cannot silence the voices of any American" this declares that they believe that it was politically motivated.

Thanks to recent revelations, we are finding that this tragedy had more to do with a mentally unstable man than with anything political. The shooter had a criminal record which was scrubbed. He had made several threats against others, and had even threatened Congresswoman Giffords on other occasions. If anything this is looking more and more like the ball was dropped by Arizona Law Enforcement and the system.  But as we all know , the extremist left has been trying to paint this as the fruit of the Political Right. After having denied and disproved this fallacy are those on the Right within the U.S. Congress going to belly up for political reasons? In their desire to look compassionate and to disassociate themselves from the shooter,will they be ignorantly associating themselves with him in this resolution? The Republican congressmen need to vote aginst this resolution. What is popular is not always right. What is right is not always popular. They need to do what is right.

Liberals Politicizing Tragedies

Leave it to the left to not miss an opening when they can find one, or rather make one. Fortunately, polls show that the majority of Americans reject the notion that any political party, group, radio, or print media was to blame for the senseless crime committed this past week. It seems the left keeps doing us a favor by showing America to what extent their desperation and lust for power will take them. As a matter of fact, we recently learned that the shooter was a registered Independent, into the occult, and volunteered at an animal shelter. If anything, he more resembles the Liberal left more than anything else. But that is neither here nor there. Once again the “Progressives” are trailblazing to new lows, I guess that’s why they consider themselves “progressive”. A little girl as well as 5 others is dead and all they can do is build hatred through their mindless rhetoric.

Based on their latest fallacy of blaming the “political climate”, they may be opening a Pandora’s Box that could end up backfiring on them.  Michelle Malkin wrote a tremendous piece documenting the vicious and cruel “political climate” created and fed by the “Progressives”. Democrat Pima County Sherriff Dupnik decided to politicize the tragedy, and hopefully enough Arizonans will now see fit to remove him from office. Yesterday I watched as Katie Couric began her backpedalling from directly connecting the tragedy to a single group, but began playing the new card that we must use the opportunity to step back and rethink the political climate. I find it odd that the many people that Michelle Malkin called out have not been called out by the “progressives” nor did they think the “political climate” was bad when they were in power.

Where was the outcry when people wished death on President Bush? Where was the outcry when two homosexuals hung an effigy of Sarah Palin in San Francisco? Where was the outcry when Kathy Griffins said that the youngest Palin was her new “target”? How many times did the “progressives” say that they wished certain Conservatives would go hunting with Dick Cheney after the hunting mishap? I guess that political climate is different from the present one, or is it that they feel that taking advantage of this tragedy is politically expedient?

This brings us to dealing with the present fallacy that the “progressives” have set forth. Their claim, as we said, is that the “political climate” has created this. Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, and countless others have supplied me with some ample responses to these “progressives”. Rush aptly commented if perhaps it was a Muslim if we would be using the same rhetoric. So based on the rhetoric of the “progressives” I have a fictitious response.

If indeed the “political climate” has caused this then the “progressives” are in a pickle as we can establish that life will imitate what it sees. If indeed certain radio personalities and groups can influence these actions, and the solution that the “progressives” set forth is to silence and remove them, then we must do the following.

·         Close down Hollywood due to their violent and mean spirited movies that glorify violence

·         Not allow any more Rap music to be produced due to its violent nature

·         Outlaw Islam based on the many similar crimes that are committed in the name of their group

·         Deport all Mexicans due to the violence in Mexico

·         Take Chris Matthews and his ilk off the air due to their divisive comments

·         Remove the liberal media from the air as they constantly criticize the Right and we all know how criticism incites violence

·         Remove spoons from America as people keep getting fat from using them (Hat Tip to Kim)

·         Remove any overweight entertainers and athletes as they glorify obesity

·         Prosecute the DNC for the assassination attempts of Presidents Reagan and Ford as we all know that it must have been politically motivated

·         Pardon Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination of President Kennedy as he is not to blame as he was made to do it due to the political environment

·         Prosecute any Hollywood actors who have ever depicted violence in their roles

·         Restitution from Hollywood to all victims of violent crime due to Hollywood’s glorification of violence

·         Punish the African American community for having such divisive things as Negro Leagues Museum, Miss Black America, Congressional Black Caucus, Historically Black Colleges, and other organizations that divide rather than unite

·         Profile any African American due to the number of African Americans in street gangs

·         Profile all Hollywood actors due to the known drug use by some

·         Outlaw any and all drinking of alcoholic beverages due to drunk drivers

So “progressives” is this what you really want? Perhaps it really is. They now feel that using such bad words as “socialism” and “communism” is divisive as well. So will we rewrite the history books much like Tom Sawyer is being rewritten? What will be called the former “communist” Soviet Union or “communist” China, redistributors of wealth? Why do progressives that embrace socialism reject being called socialists? Is it really the fact that we are calling a shoe a shoe that bothers them, or is it the fact that the shoe fits?

This strategy on the part of the “progressives” of using tragedies to advance their cause is not a new one. It has been used for centuries by other repressive parties and governments. Their strategy is to try to silence any opposition in the name of peace, when in fact they are the ones generating the greatest violence. It was President Obama that said that he (as the left) will bring a gun to a knife fight. Is this the Hope and Change that he promised? Now is not the time to shrivel up and play the “progressive’s” game. Sadly even some on the right are buying into their fallacy. Freedom of Speech requires two key ingredients. Those ingredients are freedom and speech. It is funny how the “progressives” hate the combination of the two. The only thing the left sees now is that we on the right are in a position to undo much of the bad which they have done and that bothers them. It bothers them to the extent that they are playing games with a tragedy that took the life of an innocent child who is now nothing more than a toy in the game of politics to the “progressives”.

The reality is that the greatest danger of violence is from the “progressives”. It is they who are threatening to take to the streets. So perhaps the greatest solution would be to outlaw “progressives”.

Fallacy

Updated 1/10/2011

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/


Michelle Malkin says it like no other. There are a few off color examples used so forgive me for that. But her examples show the sheer hypocrisy of the proaganda producing left.



“In logic and rhetoric, a fallacy is incorrect reasoning in argumentation resulting in a misconception. By accident or design, fallacies may exploit emotional triggers in the listener or interlocutor (e.g. appeal to emotion), or take advantage of social relationships between people (e.g. argument from authority). Fallacious arguments are often structured using rhetorical patterns that obscure the logical argument, making fallacies more difficult to diagnose.”
From Wikipedia

The tragic shooting in Arizona has brought out the worst in many liberals. While the taking of any life should be considered horrible, some have chosen to attempt to make political hay out of the tragedy. In their unbridled zeal,they have overlooked facts in order to set forth their fallacies. They have focused on the congresswoman’s political affiliation in order to attempt to create a false association between this criminal and their political enemies.
While the wounded congresswoman is indeed a Democrat, she is anything but far left. She is pro-gun and against illegal immigration. I guess that doesn’t sit well in their propaganda. But what of the judge, the judge who was murdered was a Republican appointee, yet that is not making the headlines. Tragically overlooked as well, is the murder of a little girl, as well as several others murdered, and many others wounded. But I suppose that is all just insignificant in the tin foil leftist’s agenda. Their focus is in creating the hatred of which they attempt to claim is the cause of this tragedy.
But let us focus on their fallacy. They claim that because she was a Democrat she was targeted by “right wing extremists”. I thought about this and came up with an interesting fallacy of my own. Based on the left’s logic, we now need to revisit the attempted assassination of President Reagan. Being that President Reagan was a Conservative Republican we must assume that Mr. Hinckley was an agent of the DNC. After all, if someone attacks someone from a certain party then based on tin foil liberal logic the opposing party is responsible. His infatuation with Jodie Foster was just a cover-up. We can also blame the liberal media elite of the day much like the leftists are blaming Rush Limbaugh. Therefore we must blame Peter Jennings, Barbara Walters, Ted Koppel, Dan Rather, and the many others who openly criticized President Reagan.
Obviously I have being facetious about my theory, but am using it to show how ridiculous the left is. Sadly, this smells of typical leftist propaganda that has been used in so many other countries. The definition at the top of the page speaks volumes of their motives. Their motive is to trigger emotional rather than rational responses. In reality if there is anyone to blame outside of the deranged individual who performed this crime it may well be the liberal media and politicians which have chosen to stir up bitterness through class envy and lies.
Sadly the real tragedy will be overshadowed. A little girl and others are dead and all the left can do is play games with a tragedy. This is what the left has to offer?