American Vitriol

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)

I didn't really want to talk more about the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) again, but, in light of the comments made over the past two weeks, I feel compelled to do so.  See America the Beautiful for my first post on this subject.

On the plus side, we have seen genuine outpourings of love and compassion expressed across all political spectra.  It's so pleasant to see political enemies express heartfelt sadness and support in the wake of such tragedy.  It's how families are supposed to act; it's how Americans are supposed to act.

On the other hand, there are political enemies who haven't been acting like proper siblings.

Here are some examples:

Representative  Keith Ellison (D-MN) claims that the president has created a "culture of incivility" which allows crazed individuals to "go off the rails."

"What I think is when the president says ‘punch them in the face,' ‘carry them out in a stretcher,' he creates a culture of incivility which sort of lets anybody who's loosely hinged to reality just sort of go off the rails."

I'll have to admit that I've never been a fan of President Trump's raucous brand of politics.  I have always thought that his demeanor during the campaign was decidedly un-presidential.

So, I can't argue too much about the idea that President Trump has created, or at least promulgated, an environment of adversity.


Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN)

The interesting thing to note here, however, is Representative Ellison's own past.  As a younger man, he was deeply involved with Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam.  Farrakhan is a well-known rabble rouser who uses race as a focal point to incite.  He also has a strong anti-Semitic stance.

Since the early 2000's Ellison has been denouncing Nation of Islam politics and doing his best to distance himself from it's rhetoric.

There are some signs that his Nation of Islam thoughts may not be as distant as he would like us to believe, but, as a thought experiment, let's suppose that Mr. Ellison is completely over his youthful Nation of Islam mindset.

During the time that he was involved with the Nation of Islam, he was quite active.  He wrote countless editorials, many of which were authored under the name Keith Ellison-Muhammed, and he had a radio program in which he used the name Keith Muhammed.

As a defender and promulgator of Farrakhan's message of violence and hate, wouldn't Ellison be just as guilty of creating a "culture of incivility" as he claims President Trump is?

Why not be honest and own up to the fact that our current culture of violence comes from many quarters?  If he is serious about this topic, why not admit his own culpability as a first step towards reconciliation?

In my opinion, there are two answers.

Louis Farrakhan

One is that I doubt that Ellison actually believes that he is in any way responsible for our "culture of incivility."  Of course, I can't know his mindset for certain, but that is my best guess.

The second is that, for political reasons, he can't.  If he were to admit that he ever said anything in his younger years that could have possibly contributed to our current level of civil unrest, his detractors would never let him hear the end of it.  So, there you have it.  Deny, deny, deny and hope that everyone forgets, forgets, forgets.

If we are ever to have any hope of honesty in America, we must begin with, uh, honesty.  The second step in the process is forgiveness.  Neither is easy to come by, and neither is likely to happen in the public sphere.

Our next example is the New York Times (NYT).  Soon after Rep. Scalise was shot, The NYT published an account of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' (D-AZ) shooting as a parallel to the Scalise attack.

The backstory is this: in the immediate aftermath of Giffords' 2011 shooting, the left circulated the theory that Sarah Palin's rhetoric about "targeting" certain precincts for extra campaigning led to the "targeting" of Rep. Giffords.

This theory was debunked within days of the attack because it was stupid.

It was stupid because the shooter was noted to be an apolitical paranoid schizophrenic who had been infatuated with Rep. Giffords for quite a long time.

Fast forward to the 2017 aftermath of the Scalise shooting and here we find the NYT pointing fingers at Sarah Palin again.  Apparently, Palin's "violent rhetoric" caused Giffords' attack, and Trump's rhetoric caused Scalise's.  See a pattern here?  The right is always at fault no matter who gets shot.

I guess that the NYT thought we'd all forget that the "Palin Target" theory was debunked within a day or two of Giffords' attack.  We didn't forget.  Shame on you NYT.

Thirdly, we have Phil Montag, a Nebraska Democratic official on tape saying this:

"This mother***er, like, his whole job is like to get people [to] convince Republicans to f***ing kick people off f***ing health care."



Phil Montag

He made these remarks while speaking to Chelsey Gentry-Tipton, the chairwoman of the state Democratic Party's Black caucus, and her friend, Destin Madison.

He went on to say, "I hate this mother***er, I'm f***ing glad he got shot.  I'm glad he got shot."

"So then say something," Gentry-Tipton responds.

"I'm not going to f***ing say that in public," Montag replies.

And later he says, "I wish he was f***ing dead."

Unbeknownst to Montag, Ms. Madison was recording him.
 
Uh oh.



Chelsey Gentry-Tipton

And he's not the only one of the group to be in a spot of trouble.  Ms. Gentry-Tipton posted this on Facebook:

"Watching the congressman crying on live tv abt the trauma they experienced.  Y is this so funny tho?"

In another post she wrote: "Hard to be empathetic towards those that have no empathy for us.  The very people that push pro NRA legislation in efforts to pad their pockets with complete disregard for human life.  Yeah, having a hard time feeling bad for them."

It's hard to be empathetic for a man who is fighting for his life after he was shot just for being a member of a particular political party?

My, Oh, My.  Seems like Phil and Chelsea have something of an ax to grind with Steve Scalise.

And Mr. Montag also seems to be somewhat limited in his knowledge and use of adjectives.

Oh, and, they were both taken out of context.



Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)

Lastly, we have Minority Leader and former Speaker of the House Nanci Pelosi (D-CA).  When asked whether or not rhetoric from the left might have had anything to do with the shooting, she flatly denied even the possibility of it.

In fact, she was able to pinpoint the event that began all of the personal attacks in American politics:

“It didn’t use to be this way. Somewhere in the 90s, Republicans decided on a politics of personal destruction as they went after the Clintons, and that is the provenance of it, and that is what has continued.”



Robert Bork

Hmmmmm... so, prior to the Republican attacks on the Clintons, there had never been a personal attack on a politician?

I reckon that she forgot about how, a year earlier, Supreme Court nominee Judge Robert Bork was destroyed by personal attacks from left.  The attack was so brutal that we now refer to such treatment as "Borking."

But, if we pretend that the Republicans started it with the Clinton attacks, we can at least say that the Democrats were very quick learners and more than willing participants.  All we have to do is recall the Supreme Court nomination hearings of Justice Clarence Thomas.  If that hearing wasn't about personal destruction, then, perhaps, I don't really understand what destruction actually means.


Justice Clarence Thomas

Up to that point, we had never heard anything like it from Washington.  All of Anita Hill's talk of pubic hairs still gives me the creeps.

When I began writing this post, I had a couple of examples in mind to share, but, as I began to research, I found too many to comment upon.  The extent of the politicization of this event, while not overly startling is absolutely sickening.

Rep. Scalise was still in a coma when the vitriol began.  At that point, even his survival was in question, yet his political detractors moved to cast him in the worst possible light during his hour of need.

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)

As in my first post on the subject, American the Beautiful, I'm not saying that either side is more or less vitriolic than the other.  But I am saying in this post that there are those on the left who are horribly wrong in their behavior surrounding this event.

It's amazing to me that Americans should be so hateful about their politics.

There are plenty of politicians who I think are terrible for our nation's future.  The ideas backing their rhetoric are horribly wrong.  I hate those ideas with all my heart and soul because I think that they are dangerous for my country and for my children and grand-children.

But, I have the good sense to draw the line at murder.  I guess I'm a softy because I don't even wish them dead.  On the other hand, I do wish them to be out of office.


Just to showcase my point, I decided to include a couple of posts that I found while researching.  No comment from me should be necessary.

Remember Bubba from the first post?  These two guys fit the bill of Bubba the Jackass.

Lastly, as a diehard LSU fan, I say this to Rep. Scalise, "I'm sorry about the game last night, brother."

See?  Even though the Gators won the College World Series, I don't wish them dead, tempting though it may be.  I do wish, however, that the whole Gator's pitching staff would suddenly, inexplicably be transferred to a junior college in Albania.

That would suit me just fine.

TheCurmudgeon