Everyone is pointing out that this political cycle is full of surprises. We've been amazed by the rhetoric coming from various Presidential candidates, but for sheer over-the-top-ness, we find it hard to beat "Republicans deserve some blame for the Planned Parenthood shooting" which was published by the Washington Post. It starts out:
Inflammatory rhetoric inflames. Words - extreme language and overheated representations - have consequences. The killer bears the ultimate responsibility for the carnage in Colorado Springs. But if initial reports of alleged gunman Robert Lewis Dear Jr.'s comments about "no more baby parts" prove true - and logic suggests that it was no mere coincidence the attack was at a Planned Parenthood clinic - Republican politicians who fueled the overwrought and unsupported controversy over selling baby parts bear some measure of responsibility.
The New York Times made essentially the same accusation.
Wow. Did either the WaPo or the Times assign any blame to Mr. Obama or Mr. Holder for police officer's deaths after they encouraged the Ferguson protesters who cried out, over and over, for dead policemen? Not that we've noticed.
What about the IRS targeting conservative political groups? Mr. Obama openly accused a big Republican donor of treason; his businesses were audited repeatedly shortly thereafter. A number of Senate Democrats wrote to the IRS asking that they investigate various Conservative groups. The IRS illegally gave a list of conservative donors to a liberal opposition group. Were Democrats at all to blame for any of this illegal government activity?
The WaPo said that it's not always right to blame a large group for actions of violent individuals but argued that it's OK in this case:
... But tarring the larger group with their criminal excesses is unwarranted.
The current effort to demonize Planned Parenthood feels different. This is, literally, a manufactured issue, cobbled together from doctored videotapes and overheated accusations. The organization's activities have been so mischaracterized, and the practice of providing fetal tissue so overblown and so manipulated by lawmakers and politicians, that blame for the ensuing violence falls more heavily on them. [emphasis added]
How can they say it's a manufactured issue? One of the videos shows a PP official telling people negotiating prices for baby body parts that she'd like a Lamborghini. Doesn't that sound as if PP makes at least some profit selling dead babies?
What about the video that shows an aborted baby seeming to move before it's head is sliced open so PP can sell the brain? That looks like infanticide, which is murder one. How can they say it's a "manufactured issue?"
Their own opening statement shows that they know that blaming Republicans is balderdash:
But if initial reports of alleged gunman Robert Lewis Dear Jr.'s comments about "no more baby parts" prove true ...
Mr. Dear might just possibly have been offended by PP selling baby body parts. The videos show that PP sells baby body parts. There's debate about how much profit they make, but there's no question whatever that they do swap dead babies for cash. If the stated desire of their official for a Lamborghini is any indication, their profits are substantial - those cars go for north of $180,000.
Let's look at another example. The aptly-named Linda Stasi of the New York Daily News has figured out what all Obama's horses and all Obama's men seem unable to: she known who is to blame for last week's San Bernardino massacre of Christmas party attendees by rampaging jihadist Muslims masquerading as Americans under genuine but false papers.
Surprise! The rightful blame goes to an evangelizing Christian whom they gunned down!
The other man, the victim, Nicholas Thalasinos, was a radical Born Again Christian/Messianic Jew, who also connected with his future wife online and had traveled across the country to meet her...
The victim is also inaccurately being eulogized as a kind and loving religious man.
Make no mistake, as disgusting and deservedly dead as the hate-filled fanatical Muslim killers were, Thalasinos was also a hate-filled bigot. Death can’t change that. But in the U.S., we don’t die for speaking our minds. Or we’re not supposed to anyway.
Thalasinos was an anti-government, anti-Islam, pro-NRA, rabidly anti-Planned Parenthood kinda guy, who posted that it would be “Freaking Awesome” if hateful Ann Coulter was named head of Homeland Security.
And for this offense against PC dogma, Mr. Thalasinos not only deserved to die, he helped to drive the perpetrators to go into action and thus shares the blame for the rest of the murders! Or that's what the media elites whom Ms. Stasi represents think.
Never accuse our utterly corrupt opinion-makers for exercising consistency! If Republicans really do bear blame for the PP shooting or if Mr. Thalasinos's conservative political opinions and attempts at evangelization are the cause for mass slaughter at an office party, then what about blaming Mr. Obama and Mr. Holder for recent cop killings that were the direct result of their anti-law statements? What about blaming the White House for the IRS assault on conservative individuals and groups or noting that Hillary's push to kill Qadaffi had something to do with Libya becoming ISIS-friendly?
Of course not; as we all know, Democrats are always on the side of the angels by WaPo and Times definition, to say nothing of the Daily News.
And we wonder why partisan politics has become so hostile? If liberals truly believe that Republicans are routinely culpable in murder whereas Democrats are totally innocent no matter what, how can there be any compromise on anything?
At this rate, the question will eventually come down to which side has the most guns, but surely, surely, everyone on both sides of the aisle ought to agree that we do not want that.
Or can we? If our current Powers That Be were intentionally trying to bring about an armed revolution and the accompanying societal disintegration, it's hard to imagine what they'd be doing any differently.
Over the past five years, the editors have been secretly working on a book that summarizes the fundamental viewpoints of Scragged.