Spineless Dishonesty

by Dick Mac

OK, so it's mental illness.

For argument's sake, we will say that the Tucson massacre has absolutely no connection to the violent imagery and language of the Tea Party. We'll say that a registered Republican in Arizona who owns guns has heard nothing in the past year about using gun violence and Second Amendment remedies to change the political make-up of the United States Congress.

That is, we will say that this person lived in a protective bubble of his own mental illness. I say this is quite possible. Mental illness, whether organic or induced by substance abuse, is a real and serious problem.

This is one of the lines being proffered by the Tea Party and their promoters/apologists. It's sad, though, to watch the extreme right-wing acknowledge mental illness as a problem when it suits their needs, but are wholly dismissive of it as an actual problem in our nation. But that's a different story, isn't it!

From Jon Stewart to Bill O'Reilly, talking heads are telling us that it is both sides that are responsible for the violent rhetoric; and I beg to differ. Although we can certainly find isolated incidents of Democrats and/or liberals using gun terms as descriptors, it is folly (bordering on insane) to compare those incidents to the constant, perpetual gun and gun violence imagery used by the Tea Party from signs at rallies to advertisements to actual interviews.

Sure, let's come to an agreement that we will all stop using the language of guns and gun violence in our political discourse; but let's not pretend that both sides of the political divide have been equally responsible for it. That is irresponsible.

One of the most irritating dynamics of all this is the spinelessness of the Tea Party, their supporters and apologists. They have used this tough guy language to set themselves apart from the rest of us; to make themselves seem tougher: tougher on crime, tougher on reform, tougher on budgeting; tougher on protecting our children; tougher on protecting the sanctity of marriage. The Tea Party and those who are exploiting the fervor whipped-up by the Tea Party, have used this rhetoric very effectively. Now that this tough-guy attitude is thrust into the limelight, correctly or incorrectly, the Tea Party and their followers suddenly distance themselves from it.

Oh, we didn't mean that kind of taking-out; we didn't mean that kind of Second Amendment remedy; we didn't mean reload a gun, we meant the other kind of "taking-out" and "Second Amendment remedies"!

One of Palin's minions, a woman named Rebecca Mansour, has actually insisted that the cross-hairs Palin's team placed over twenty Congressional districts during the last election were not actually gun sight cross-hairs, they were surveyor's marks.

WHAT?!?!?! You spineless teabagger! That's your explanation? We are supposed to believe that?

The Tea Party is so tough on crime and so serious about protecting the Second Amendment that they will take a surveyor's level and . . . do what? Measure the height of the terrain on which they plan to build a statue of Glenn Beck? What is the Tea Party going to do with the data collected when using a surveyor's level to measure Arizona's 8th District?

This is typical conservative behavior. They do no have the courage of their convictions. Instead of saying: "My God, we had no idea it would come to this, let's make some changes," they have circled the wagons and started lying (which is what they do best) in an attempt to deflect negative publicity.

The Tea Party apologists would have us believe that mental illness is the reason why the lone nihilistic gunman decided to massacre a group of people, that the violent rhetoric and violent culture promoted by the Tea Party in the past year has had no cultural impact on us, and that a leader of the Tea Party is using surveyor's marks to highlight her point about promoting political change in our nation.

Have a spine! Have the courage of your convictions. I'm not saying that this incident is your fault, per se; but don't insult me by saying that your promotion of gun violence and use of gun imagery is all a big misunderstanding. Don't pretend that you have had no role in raising the level of violent rhetoric in our political discourse. Hold your ground! Have some fortitude. Be strong. Don't slither away like snakes under a rock until the problems go away.

Or do. The true colors of Tea Party Leaders is showing. In Alaska, the ice is yellow. A spineless, dishonest leader is hiding from her own success.

Cowards!

In Aftermath of Shooting: Calls for Security, Civility, at The Wall Street Journal

Palin, Amid Criticism, Stays in Electronic Comfort Zone, at The New York Times

What a Crooked Cross Sarah Palin Bears, at Esquire Magazine

There Are Consequences

by Dick Mac

Yes, there are consequences.

The faux noise about the Tucson slaughter is now focused on the fact that the Democrats published a map of targeted states in a previous election. They imply that this is bad as Sarah Palin's cross hairs map, by extension exonerating Palin's irresponsible and hateful campaign tactics. Somehow Sharron Angle keeps slipping off the radar, and she is as bad as Palin in the social irresponsibility department - the promotion of gun violence against fellow Americans.

I would never say that all Republicans are gun-toting crazies; but it does seem that all gun-toting crazies are Republicans.

Democrats, generally, aren't focused on preserving an amendment that is in no danger of repeal. The Second Amendment is going nowhere, there is nobody who is trying to repeal the Second Amendment, there has never been a campaign to repeal the Second Amendment. In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that no collection of Americans (such as a municipality) can pass laws that limit or criminalize the possession of guns. This is a non-issue.

The entire Tea Party campaign focused on the Second Amendment is a publicity stunt by the Republicans to appeal to the basest, most frightened Americans: whites on the bottom of the economic food chain (a huge number of people), who have nothing, will have less as time goes by, and cling to what few things they can afford and hold near and dear to them: God, country, beer, and ammunition.

The obsessive discussions of the Second Amendment have whipped the least responsible Americans into a frenzy of gun hysteria. These people carry their guns to public events, use language about guns to threaten elected officials, and vote for the people least interested in their economic well-being because those politicians say they will protect their guns.

I have nothing against guns. They are inanimate objects, like cars, pitchforks, and other items made of metal. A gun is a tool, it is not a status symbol or an extension of your penis. When guns are used properly, they are amazing. Guns have been part of society for five hundred years; guns aren't going anywhere.

Sharron Angle and Sarah Palin have made careers on the adoration of guns and the fears of gun owners. When they talk about gun violence and use the imagery of guns and create catchy buzz-words about guns and produce clever graphics with guns, they are creating not some arena for important dialogue; they are encouraging people carrying guns to become hostile. And there are consequences:



The focus that Republicans put on the Second Amendment during their campaigning is a nifty tactic to prevent people from talking about the real issues of our society. And although the Second Amendment is a very important part of our nation, not everybody is a gun owner.

Even in 1775, not everyone was a gun owner. The Second Amendment may not be as important to non-gun owners as say, the First, Third and the Fourth Amendments. Certainly, in 1775, more Americans needed the protection of the Third and Fourth Amendments than the Second.

I do not say any of this to minimize the importance of the Second Amendment, I just want it put into perspective with all the other Amendments, and all the other facts that make America great.

Our almost pornographic obsession with guns isn't bad, but it is a bit embarrassing, and dangerous. Is this all we have to talk about? And are guns that important to gun owners that the imagery and language of gun violence is now an acceptable form of campaigning?

Yes, we have found a graphic created by the Democrats a few years ago using bulls-eyes on states with races that they were focused on. During that campaign, though, I do not recall any Democrats using the language of gun violence, the promotion of gun use, or the glorification of gun ownership to make their points. Never have I heard a Democrat suggest, never mind say outright, that an elected official should be "taken out" with "Second Amendment remedies."

Maybe some Democrat in the past ten years has used this language; but it would be news to me, and likely news to you.

We need to stop the gun violence rhetoric, and it's not the liberals and the Democrats that have their hands on the volume control. Sharron Angle, Sarah Palin, and their overlords at Fox News need to find a way to campaign without promoting gun violence. There are plenty of other issues for conservatives to focus on. Many vital issues of conservative beliefs need attention. Guns don't need attention. Guns are OK. Nobody's taking away your guns. Nobody was ever going to take away your guns.

Let's move on. Let's put the guns back in the gun case where they are safe, let's get back to debating the real issues ahead of us. Let's go to rallies and public gatherings without guns. Let's stop using the language of guns to frighten our opponents.

And let's indict Sharron Angle and Sarah Palin as soon as possible for their irresponsible promotion of murder, political assassination, and overthrow of our government.