It's not quite as unusual as a solar eclipse, but today is one day where I'm going to at least partially agree with something that Charles Blow has written in The New York Times:
Great. So the left overreacts and overreaches and it only accomplishes two things: fostering sympathy for its opponents and nurturing a false equivalence within the body politic. Well done, Democrats.
Now we’ve settled into the by-any-means-necessary argument: anything that gets us to focus on the rhetoric and tamp it down is a good thing. But a wrong in the service of righteousness is no less wrong, no less corrosive, no less a menace to the very righteousness it’s meant to support.
You can’t claim the higher ground in a pit of quicksand.
I agree. Thank you, Mr. Blow.
But. Come on, you knew there had to be a "but."
But, even if the shooter had been a Tea Party member or a registered Republican and legally sane, it still would be wrong to assign collective guilt based on the action of an individual. Just because it involves political philosophy instead of race or religion doesn't make collective guilt any less ugly and dehumanizing. But what about all of that "violent rhetoric" we keep hearing about?
For the most part it's hysteria. Seriously. All that talk from tea partiers about "Taking back America" is very, very, scary! Except of course, when Democrats called their plan to gain control of Congress in 2006...wait for it..."Take Back America." Democrats even had a "Take Back America Conference" in June of 2006. And that "armed and dangerous" quote of Michelle Bachmann that keeps getting recycled is a complete distortion. Taking it as a literal call to arms immediately grants one automatic induction into the Hysterical Tool Hall of Shame.
There's nothing wrong with martial metaphors and heated rhetoric in political speech. That stuff has been around forever and is harmless so long as it is not taken too far. You know, like actually saying things such as "Put him against the wall and shoot him." I would hope we could all agree that one is over the top, even if meant as some kind of metaphor. The lesser stuff? It's called free speech. People are certainly free to criticize it, but they really should at least try not to be flaming hypocrites when they do, and way too many Democrats fit that bill over the last week.
Charles Blow deserves praise for recognizing the Tucson shooting for what it is. I would urge caution on all sides though, to pay attention to the larger issue of attempted collective guilt. Nobody knows the future and the next deranged gunman could be a Democrat murdering a Republican. If that happens it would be just as wrong to blame all Democrats as it was to blame conservatives and Republicans for Tucson. I hope that my Democrat friends agree.
Recent Comments