As the MSM tries to say we shouldn't politicize the attempted political assasination of a Democratic representative let's step back and remember some things.
The new Speaker, Rep. John Boehner campaigned for a Nazi reenactorin an attempt to rally others to defeat Marcy Kaptur in 2010.
Okay, this is provocative: According to Rich Iott's website--you remember him, don't you?--presumptive Speaker of the House John Boehner will campaign with Iott on Saturday. This seems strange on many levels. There's the Nazi reenacting level. The Iott-isn't-going-to-win level. And the Eric Cantor-has-repudiated-Iott level, which is doubly interesting because Cantor could possibly challenge Boehner for speaker. I'd have assumed that Boehner would be spending the last weekend before the election stumping for candidates in closer races. Not sure what's going on here. But I trust there's no dressing up involved.
Think anyone will notice? Yeah, me too.
The DCCC's Ryan Rudominer says, "Not only has John Boehner recruited, embraced, and financed a disgraced Nazi enthusiast running for Congress, but now Boehner is pouring gasoline on the fire by holding a campaign rally with him. Unbelievably, this comes on the heels of John Boehner also embracing an Ohio congressional candidate being sued for attempted rape and sexual assault, and another who has ties to an organized crime syndicate that brands women like cattle.Thumbing his nose at our nation's veterans, women, and people of the Jewish faith, all the while refusing to stand up for basic American values in order to try and win an election, apparently this is what Boehner meant when he said, "We're not going to be any different than what we've been."
When I read Speaker Boehner's poignant statement on the shooting of Rep. GiffordsJosh Green's post at the Atlantic came back to meand I was disgusted. The media has aided and abetted the radicalization of rhetoric that has occurred on the right. The difference between now and the early '90s; the media then spoke out and reported how far out of the norm these political actives of the militias were and the right-wing rhetoric wasn't acceptable.
Politico noted in a story today about this difference quoting an unnamed Republican senator:
A senior Republican senator, speaking anonymously in order to freely discuss the tragedy, told POLITICO that the Giffords shooting should be taken as a "cautionary tale" by Republicans.
"There is a need for some reflection here - what is too far now?" said the senator. "What was too far when Oklahoma City happened is accepted now. There’s been a desensitizing. These town halls and cable TV and talk radio, everybody’s trying to outdo each other."
The vast majority of tea party activists, this senator said, ought not be impugned.
"They’re talking about things most mainstream Americans are talking about, like spending and debt," the Republican said, before adding that politicians of all stripes need to emphasize in the coming days that "tone matters."
"And the Republican Party in particular needs to reinforce that," the senator said.
You know what: there was a time when the media would discuss the tea party's Nativism and anti-federalist rhetoric rather than gloss over and brush past the obscene racist images found constantly and the anti-government vehemence. But time and again on cable I found constant excuses, the mantra that this tea party group wasn't about anti-government extremists from the right, it wasn't about racism in the right, it was about the deficit.
The tea party isn't to blame, ITA. But let's be clear that the incendiary and inflammatory rhetoric, the racist images, the violence used casually in conversation (second amendment remedies) created a backdrop for a clearly ill man to be pushed towards violence.
And that violence has been directed primarily at Democratic politicians.
Speaker Pelosi was called out for commenting on this in 2009 and said to be "politicizing" individual actions when she said this:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw ... I saw this myself in the late '70s in San Francisco," Pelosi said, choking up and with tears forming in her eyes. "This kind of rhetoric is just, is really frightening and it created a climate in which we, violence took place and ... I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made."
Rush Limbaugh called it the tears of a clown. Go down the page and Real Clear Politics links to the audio.
This is what the media has enabled by continually playing the "both sides do it" as Matt Bai did again in the NYTimes today. And the reason why was made clear by Politico:
But of course Oklahoma City also illustrates how much more quickly the political culture moves than 16 years ago. Back then, the political debate did not begin in earnest until five days after the bombings, when Clinton in a speech in Minneapolis denounced conservative commentators with "loud and angry voices" who he said "spread hate" and "leave the impression...by their very words, that violence is acceptable."
At the same time, Clinton political advisers privately embraced a ghoulish reality: The tragedy had been good for the president’s standing. Dick Morris, then Clinton’s top consultant, wrote the president a memo shortly after the bombing about how to maximize the advantage: "A. Temporary gain: boost in ratings. B. More permanent gain: Improvements in character/personality attributes—remedies weakness, incompetence, ineffectiveness found in recent poll. C. Permanent possible gain: sets up Extremist Issue vs. Republicans."
After saying that the President response was apolitical and appropriate; they point out how clearly this will "help" him based on past precedent. With Republicans in control in the House; no one wants to burn bridges. And the political culture that has allowed far more inflammatory images and speech to be ignored, to be allowed, to not be held up and called out continues today. Because for some reason, calling a spade a spade is wrong if it helps Democrats.
That's how I feel. I'm really angry about this for my country, for the victims, for Rep. Giffords and her family. But I'm also exhausted by the fact that the clear pattern of what was once considered politically illegitimate discourse that the GOP embraced is being ignored.
That is not acceptable.
I'm sure all of you have a list of similar things in 2010/2009. I was frankly to repulsed by all of these events to go googling.
I want to end by saying Rep. Giffords, her family, the other victims, and those that paid the ultimate price are in my thoughts and prayers. God willing, this won't happen again. Thank you if you got through this, I'm just really upset so I'm not sure how coherent I was.