Jonah Goldberg: "Right" Exploits Empty Heads Like Palin, Bush, and McSweegan
Kathleen
ca...@drcarolgoodheart.com, lPick...@cdc.gov, Durlan...@yale.edu,
Aa...@columbia.edu, gary_w...@nymc.edu,
scientifi...@ostp.gov, pkru...@princeton.edu,
Stanle...@fiu.edu, margaret...@hhs.fds.gov,
emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@ct.gov, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@ct.gov, kur...@washpost.com, georg...@washpost.com,
p...@allegorypress.com, commissi...@po.state.ct.us,
brans...@comcast.net, vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us,
freet...@charter.net, scott....@po.state.ct.us,
govern...@po.state.ct.us, attorney...@ct.gov,
randall...@usdoj.gov, Robert....@yale.edu, editor@greenwich-
post.com, harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com,
fr...@nytimes.com, saint....@sbcglobal.net, rre...@berkeley.edu,
pcal...@tribune.com
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com,
rast...@aol.com, billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com,
rjmu...@aol.com, paulcrai...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com
Subject: Jonah Goldberg: "Right" Exploits Empty Heads Like Palin,
Bush, and McSweegan
Date: Jan 15, 2011 6:25 AM
ARTICLE BELOW
==========================
No. The Neoconservatives go looking
for empty heads to fill, and now
we have Cheney and Edward McSweegan
http://www.actionlyme.org/TICK_BITE_CONSPIRACY.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org?GOLDWATER_LETTER.htm
(you ^^^ flatter these wise-guys to
do your bidding), and Palin and Bush.
Palin and Bush were chosen by the
Israelis because they're *stupid.*
Admit it.
They're *stupid* and have no knowledge
of history or science.
These are *your* cowboy "gut" American
Action Heroes.
This is what is missing from the
whole picture: You NeoCons picked
George Bush so you could have your
wars and NAZI-Fascist-Paranoid-Loser
-Nation do your bidding. The next
generation Bushie-Cowboy was Sarah Palin,
chosen by the Neocons because they found
her by *accident* on an Alaskan cruise.
You got what you wanted.
The focus of the nation is on the
Neocons' Cowboy Picks, but you *hope*
the whole thing will blow over before
a full analysis.
Not happenin.
KMDickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
http://www.relapsingfever.org
=========================================
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110115/OPINION09/301159994/-1/RSS&template=printart
Published: January 15. 2011 12:01AM
Jonah Goldberg: Left exploits Tucson shootings
Jonah Goldberg
In the wake of the horrendous shooting rampage in Tucson, why isn't
anyone talking about banning "Mein Kampf"? Or "The Communist
Manifesto"? Or for that matter, "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and
"The Phantom Tollbooth"?
After all, unlike Sarah Palin's absurdly infamous Facebook map with
cross hairs on congressional districts that some pundits have blamed
for the violence, we have some evidence -- suspect Jared Lee
Loughner's own words -- that these books were a direct influence on
him.
And to listen to partisan ghouls such as Keith Olbermann exploiting
this horrific crime, any rhetoric or writing or images that
contributed to it must be stopped, and those who don't accept blame
and then repent (specifically Palin) must be "dismissed from
politics."
Note: It's apparent from evidence found by the authorities and from
interviews with the alleged killer's friends and acquaintances that
Loughner has fixated on Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords since 2007,
long before anyone heard of the "tea parties" or, in most cases,
Palin. Moreover, his grievance with Giffords appears to be unrelated
to any coherent -- or even incoherent -- ideological platform. Rather,
it drew on the bilious stew of resentments this young man cultivated
as he lost his grip on reality.
Indeed, according to a fascinating interview in Mother Jones with one
of Loughner's close friends, this twisted soul was apparently an
ardent believer in "lucid dreaming" in which he could control an
alternate "'Matrix'-style" reality.
Something similar seems to be taking hold in more respectable
quarters. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman insists he wasn't
surprised this happened because he saw it coming, even though the
facts in this dimension don't support his premonitions.
But rather than beat up on those who've migrated from the reality-
based community, it might be worthwhile to take them at their word.
If these people seriously believe that the tea parties and Palin's
"lock and load" rhetoric are to blame, then what shall we do about it?
It's hard to find a serious answer to this question. For most of these
ideological ambulance chasers, it seems enough to lay the blame at
Republican or right-wing feet in an effort to anathematize ideas they
don't like.
But that's shortsighted. Misplaced panics like this have a momentum
and logic all their own. Already, Rep. Bob Brady (D-Pa.) has drafted
legislation to ban the use of symbols (cross hairs on a map, for
instance) or language ("lock and load!") that could foster violence.
"The rhetoric is just ramped up so negatively, so high, that we have
got to shut this down," he told CNN.
That opens the bidding. The question is, where will it end?
If the alleged shooter had been inspired by a movie or TV show -- as
any number of murderers have been over the years -- would those
blaming the tea parties join with social conservatives in blaming
Hollywood? Would they celebrate new laws to "shut down" such fare?
Mark David Chapman, who murdered John Lennon, claimed to be in part
inspired by "Catcher in the Rye." Should that be banned? Or if not
banned, should we "dismiss" from public life anyone who doesn't
denounce J.D. Salinger?
When the subject of censorship or the "chilling" of free expression
comes up in other contexts, the very idea that books, movies or TV can
be blamed for the actions of the criminal or the deranged is met with
unbridled scorn. I actually disagree with that. If books can inspire
us positively, surely they can inspire us negatively, too. But we
understand that we don't blame books for the rare demons who feed on
them.
No doubt this will cause eye-rolling among those who simply want to
keep the focus on demonizing conservatives and never bother to think
ahead about the consequences of their misplaced hysteria. One noble
exception is Slate's Jack Shafer, who probably goes farther than I
would when he writes, "Any call to cool 'inflammatory' speech is a
call to police all speech, and I can't think of anybody in government,
politics, business or the press that I would trust with that power."
Meanwhile, many proud liberals, not to mention dedicated journalists,
see no problem with fueling a mass panic over our "political
discourse." The fact that liberal rhetoric and images are often just
as "extreme" is irrelevant. Also irrelevant is any violence that might
be linked to such rhetoric. And the fact that the shooting suspect's
motivations may lay in a reality of his own design? That's irrelevant
too.
These critics' aim is simply to exploit this horror as an opportunity
to yell "shut up" at their political opponents.
JONAH GOLDBERG is a syndicated columnist, an editor-at-large of
National Review Online and a visiting fellow at the American
Enterprise Institute (Jonahs...@aol.com).
KMDickson