Disingenuous Leftists & a Jaundiced Press

Byron York does a superb job of contrasting the way the media handled the Fort Hood shooting and the Tucson shooting.

On November 5, 2009, Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire at a troop readiness center in Ft. Hood, Texas, killing 13 people. Within hours of the killings, the world knew that Hasan reportedly shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before he began shooting, visited websites associated with Islamist violence, wrote Internet postings justifying Muslim suicide bombings, considered U.S. forces his enemy, opposed American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as wars on Islam, and told a neighbor shortly before the shootings that he was going "to do good work for God." There was ample evidence, in other words, that the Ft. Hood attack was an act of Islamist violence.

Nevertheless, public officials, journalists, and commentators were quick to caution that the public should not "jump to conclusions" about Hasan's motive…

"I'm on Pentagon chat room," said former CIA operative Robert Baer on CNN, also the night of the shooting. "Right now, there's messages going back and forth, saying do not jump to the conclusion this had anything to do with Islam."

And then Tucson happened.

In the hours after the attack, little was known about Loughner beyond some bizarre and largely incomprehensible YouTube postings that, if anything, suggested he was mentally ill. Yet the network that had shown such caution in discussing the Ft. Hood shootings openly discussed the possibility that Loughner was inspired to violence by…Sarah Palin. Although there is no evidence that Loughner was in any way influenced by Palin, CNN was filled with speculation about the former Alaska governor.

There is a word for this kind of journalism: jaundiced. CNN is hardly the worst offender. Paul Krugman has this:

We don't have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was. [Giffords]'s been the target of violence before. And for those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind Republicans might be able to work with, might be a target, the answer is that she's a Democrat who survived what was otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona, precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist. (Her father says that "the whole Tea Party" was her enemy.) And yes, she was on Sarah Palin's infamous "crosshairs" list.

Not to be outdone, Michael Daly has a piece on the New York Daily News with this flamboyant title: "Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district".

Here is what Sarah Palin said on the Facebook page where she depicted Gabrielle Giffords in the cross hairs of a rifle scope: "Don't retreat! Instead - RELOAD!"

What, exactly, is that "crosshairs" list? Here is the image that Palin's group posted. I have heard this image mentioned about a dozen times over the last two days.

Contrary to what Daly says, Giffords wasn't depicted here. Her district was. Giffords may in fact be so stupid as not to know that "targeting" something one is "aiming at" is customary usage in politics as it is in business. I think he is rather a contemptible son of a bitch. If he really thinks that this graph is tantamount to encouraging murder, what about this one:

That is pretty much the same graph constructed in the same way. Bull's eye targets replace cross hairs, with the targets defined by a scheme of political vulnerability. But notice those words "Behind Enemy Lines". That's militaristic language now, isn't it?

Another bit of Republican malfeasance? Actually, that is from the Democratic Leadership Council and dates back to 2004. It is still on their website.

In fact Krugman and Daly are scoundrels. They are cynically exploiting a tragedy as part of a campaign to delegitimize those who disagree with them. They accuse Republicans, conservatives, and Tea Party activists of encouraging political violence, but their only evidence consists of language and images that they themselves and other Democrats routinely use.

They figure they can get away with it because they are backed by a jaundiced press.

Comments

[Miranda]

I am not as troubled by the reaction of Krugman and Daly as I am by that of Senator Dick Durbin. One expects this sort of thing from Krugman. But he is only a columnist. Durbin (see: http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/09/arizona.shooting.rhetoric/) ought to know better.

[unicorn4711]

I see Krugman as guilty of thinking outloud and jumping to conclusions. This could happen unconciously. People tend to see motives that confirm their own suspicions, even without evidence to support it. We all infer motives from evidence. When there is no evidence, we infer motives anyway. It happens all the time in jury trials, which is why our system goes out of its way to prevent unnecessarily prejudicial evidence from being heard by the jury. We want the weight of the evidence to be considered on its own, seperate from unrelated information that colors how jurors view the defendant. (Yes, I realize the rules for exclusion of prejudicial are quite complicated--potential prejudice is weighed against probative value--but the core idea holds.) I don't think that it is necessarily the case that Krugman actually knows he is ignoring evidence (or the lack there of) that this was politically motivated and intentially suspecting that it was in his column in order to further his political agenda. There's little evidence of that too. In short, I see the guy as a hack trying to promote his policy objectives, but I can't go so far as to say he's intentionally distorting how his readers think about the incident.

[unicorn4711]

Awesome DNC find, by the way.

[Bill Fleming]

I have been working for some time to expunge the militaristic language from our process at the agency. It's standard marketing jargon. And, in my mind, obsolete. We shouldn't be talking about 'target' audiences and going after them as if they were prisoners we were trying to capture. It's emphatically the wrong set of metaphors for the new marketplace. We should be trying to build relationships, help and understand and nurture each other.

That said, it's not easy to change old language and thinking habits.

[BillW]

Ken,

On Sunday morning the Tea Party's regular email update to its followers led with, "In a moment, a leftist lunatic destroyed a half a dozen lives. Six were killed. Others were wounded, including Congressman Gabrielle Giffords." krugman et al assigning blame to the right without supporting facts is on par with the Tea Party describing the shooter as a "leftist".

Both sides of the political spectrum are blatanatly guilty of intellectual dishonesty and laziness, and writing to rouse the emotions of their followers.

[George Mason]

The media finally got a round to interviewing people who knew the killer. He is described as a "left wing drug abuser." Krugman will probably offer him rehab.

[Jimi]

The left has to do "blame Republicans and Conservatives" immediately after a tragety, because they know it only takes a couple of days of facts to start coming out to make that strategy in-operatable.

Go back a look at all the MSM, New York Times, Daily Kos, and Huff Post tragety reporting of anything remotely political, and they immediately blame "Republicans and Conservatives" right out of the gate, only to be proven incorrect shortly after. But I guess from their perspective, once you get the intial rumor started, it does enough damage (i.e. it reaches enough of the idiot 52% who gave Democrats the Super Majority in 2008), and of course the MSM will always run cover for them.

The real tragety is the loss of life of the little girl, yes...Mrs. Giffords being shot is bad, and I wish it didn't happend, but the little girl getting caught in the mix makes every American feel shame and pain!

[BillW]

George,

What is the source for the quote in which the media identify people who know the AZ shooter describing him as a "left wing drug abuser"? I can find no such quote in any media reports on the matter.

[KB]

Unicorn: Krugman has been wagging a campaign against Republicans and the Tea Party for at least a year. It consisted mostly of castigating the latter for using language and images that he himself and other Democrats use routinely. This is very deliberate, and it is either stupid or scurrilous or both.

[KB]

Bill: perhaps there is a language more appropriate (=more effective?) for the marketplace than the military one. However, I have no sympathy for the demilitarization of language in general. The only way to make language inoffensive is to make it as bland as possible. See the removal of the "n" word from Huck Finn.

[Bill Fleming]

KB, yes, my concern is not one of linguistic censorship but rather a matter of context and appropriateness to the tasks at hand. It is no longer possible (or, in my opinion, even smart) to try to "conquer" a market. The most savvy marketing people are using words like "hijack" wherein the customers are encouraged to take your brand over and make it their own.

http://www.brandchannel.com/books_reviews.asp?sb_id=16388

[larry kurtz]

Rhetoric like Beck’s “constitution hanging by a thread,” Nugent’s “suck on this” referring to the automatic weapon in his law-breaking grip, and Palin’s crosshair map are indicative of The Right’s commitment to the destruction of the Democratic Party.

Loughner had a hundred rounds with him likely visualizing the white horse prophesy to which Glenn Beck refers in the LDS-based sermons to his minions aired in the Loughner household.

[Jimi]

Larry"

WTF?

"Loughner had a hundred rounds with him likely visualizing the white horse prophesy to which Glenn Beck refers in the LDS-based sermons to his minions aired in the Loughner household."

You pulled that out of your ass......now put it back in!

[larry kurtz]

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/1/10/chip_berlet_on_the_becking_of

[KB]

Jimi: be kind to Larry. The snow is chartreuse on his world.

[BillW]

God gave you a brain, Larry. You ought to use it. You cite a link to an extreme left wing web site opinion piece by a guy named Chip Berlet from Political Research Associates - publiceye.org - an extreme left wing group that exists solely to smear conservatives.

I'll give you credit, though. While Berlet gives you little more credibility than had you pulled the'facts' 'from your ass', at least you have a source. There does not seem to be any source for your extreme right counter-part George's assertion that the AZ shooter's acquaintances described him as a "left wing drug abuser".

As in the media at large, there seems to be a blizzard of bias based entirely upon fiction flying around KB's blog today.

[larry kurtz]

Blue, Doc. It's blue. http://interested-party.blogspot.com/2011/01/ip-poll-respondents-reject-christian.html Reproduction between christians should be outlawed.

[Jimi]

Bill,

From Catie Parker:

"As I knew him, he was Left-Wing, quite Liberal. Oddly obsessed with the 2012 Prophecy."

&

"He was a Political Radical, and met Giffords once before."

&

"He was a Pot Head."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/IceStar/jared-loughner-youtube-videos-_n_806370_73359077.html

[unicorn4711]

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voicemail-phone-message?page=1

This is a fantastic piece. By which I mean the investigative work and writing are fantastic. The subject matter is horrible.

It seems like his biggest motive was not receiving an adequate answer at a previous rally to a question cryptic question regarding linguistics.

[BillW]

Jimi,

You are citing the Twittering of a kid who acknowledges that she has not seen the shooter since 2007. Have you read the rest of her Tweets? I am sure she is a sweet girl, but hardly a serious source. And to put the words "left wing drug abuser" in quotation marks is a lie.

[BillW]

Unicorn,

It is an interesting piece, and it includes the detailed observations of a kid who was much closer to the shooter - right up until the night before the shooting ... and that kid says the shooter had no particular political bent and that he was off of drugs ... a direct contradiction of the 3-4 year old memories of a kid gleaned from 140 character max Tweets.

[Jimi]

Bill,

Anyone who cites the Communist Manifesto as their favorite book, has a political bent

[Jimi]

Bill,

Anyone who cites the Communist Manifesto as their favorite book, has a political bent

[BillW]

You gotta be kidding Jimi. There you go again citing only the facts that fit your theory. The kid also listed Mein Kampf among his favorites. His 'great books' list was basically the compulsory reading requirement for a high school junior ... and after he read those books he declared the rest of the world to be illiterate for not having soared to his intellectual heights. The kid was a high school drop out, junior college reject not mentally capable of understanding or holding a political philosophy.

[larry kurtz]

Hey, this episode is just one more call for single-payer universal health care in the US; this kid just might have been spotted in a blue state. Expect despair in a state where schools are defunded, apartheid is status quo, and teachers are asked to consider astrology as a factor in climate change.

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/local/top-stories/article_f14b4eee-c74d-5377-a3ed-7c0dec8752cb.html

[Jimi]

Larry,

You have rendered me speechless. I'm too busy laughing and crying, figure that?

[Jimi]

Bill,

the Communist Manifesto is not part of a curriculum. It is the teachings of the radical left. So your theory, this for sure had to do with political thought, but chose a political figure to shoot randomly?

[BillW]

Jimi,

The Communist Manifesto is, in fact, part of the curriculum in most schools. I am sure all seven of my kids were required to read at least some of it, as was I. It is an important historical book and Karl Marx was an important historical figure, and studying them is necessary for anyone to understand basic economics.

The shooter was apparently was unhappy with Giffords' failure to give him a coherent answer to his incoherent question at a prior 'Congress On the Corner' event, "What is government if words have no meaning?" That question does not strike me as indicative of any particular political bias. John McCain should be grateful that he was not the one holding the most convenient event for the kid to show up and ask his nonsensical question.

If you want to use simple logic - a politician was shot, therefore the shooting was political - then it seems to me that you have to continue your simple thought ... a Democrat politician was shot, therefore the shooting was driven by Republican political ideology. I don't think you want to go there, do you?

[BillW]

Larry,

If you think this was an act of despair, rather than mental illness, you seem to be the only person in the free world who has drawn that outrageous conclusion.

How would universal health care have changed things? The local community college faculty and staff, law enforcement from the college, Tucson and Marana, at least two court systems, the kid's own mother for that matter, and the congresswoman he approached with his absurd question a few years back are all civil servants. How would having more government in the kid's life have changed things when the long list of government representatives he interacted with failed to take action?

And what on earth does climate change have to do with anything?

And comparing Arizona's immigration laws to apartheid is an insulting disservice to the people in South Africa who suffered and died for the cause of racial equality. Shame on you.

[larry kurtz]

Outrageous is the perfect adjective. South Dakota and Arizona are failed states.

[larry kurtz]

How unfortunate that art thickens non-patrons.

Apartheid is alive and well in states where reservations exist. It's a matter of time before someone or some entity revolts against its results.

[larry kurtz]

For those of you living under the constraints put on Bill Janklow's idea of public radio:

http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-01-11/serious-psychiatric-disorders-among-young-adults

[BillW]

Larry,

To compare an American Indian reservation in the United States, from which the residents are free to leave any time they wish and enjoy all of the rights and freedoms of an American citizen any time they wish, with apartheid demonstrates a breadth of ignorance of the oppression people living under real apartheid experience is staggering.

[larry kurtz]

The words of neo-colonialists are the stuff of abrogated treaties. ip is just the messenger.

[larry kurtz]

Yer not getting it, are you? Violence means nothing left to lose. This kid is transparent. When history fails, change it.

[SeriousLee]

The most striking thing about the left's reaction to this story hit me. They blamed someone other than Bush. They must finally be ready to move on...

[Jimi]

BillW,

"then it seems to me that you have to continue your simple thought ... a Democrat politician was shot, therefore the shooting was driven by Republican political ideology. I don't think you want to go there, do you?"

No I don't want to go there, because as I stated on the other thread, I believe the driving force was more that just political thought......mental illness played the driving role, but political thought is involved. I also don't want to go there because you framed the arguement...if I were to frame the arguement then it would have been...."A Blue Blog Democrat ex-Republican politician was shot, therefore the shooting was driven by hardcore leftist political ideology."....See the difference?

And BTW, where on earth did you go to school, where the Communist Manifesto was introduced as a study of economics? Only in the 400 Level Courses of Economics at the larger Universities will the Communist Manifesto be brought into the picture as a matter of case study in Economics. I don't see this in Mr. Loughner's life. And there isn't a public school that I know of that is going to get away with introducing the Communist Manifesto for any social science studies.....Only in the 400 Level courses with specified degree paths.

[BillW]

Jimi,

No I don't see the difference. All I see is an ideologue who is hell-bent on using the tragic act of an insane person to advance his political theories in spite of overwheling evidence that the shooter was deeply mentally disturbed, living in a world of his own creation, with little awareness of reality. That makes you no better than Paul Krugman.

I went to high school I Ohio. My kids attended high schools in South Dakota, Michigan, and Arizona. Communism and socialism were taught in every one of their schools - not advocated, but the theory is explained. Any school that does not tell students who Karl Marx was, what communism is, and the basis for the social, political and economic system that drove the Soviet Union, and now drives China, Cuba and North Korea is a very poor school indeed.

Are you serious in stating that kids graduate from schools in your area in total ignorance of the the history and theory of communism? Did you really go out into the world as a diploma carrying adult with no clue as to any economic or political system other that ours? Did you actually meet the history requirements of your state and sit for an SAT or ACT exam oblivious to who Marx, Lenin or Mao were?

[Donald Pay]

Most states have content standards. I have linked South Dakota's Social Studies standards below. These standards include knowledge of economic theories, and specifically mention Karl Marx and Adam Smith. Any high school that teaches economics or world history or modern history is going to teach about Marx, and probably have a recommended reading from Marx (maybe not all of Das Kapital, but an excerpt or two).

http://doe.sd.gov/contentstandards/documents/SocialStudies_9-12.pdf

[Donald Pay]

Any comments?

http://www.azcentral.com/community/ahwatukee/articles/2011/01/11/20110111gabrielle-giffords-arizona-shooting-resignations.html

[Jimi]

"Are you serious in stating that kids graduate from schools in your area in total ignorance of the the history and theory of communism?"

Yeah it one thing to pass over what Communism is and who Karl Marx was. But it is another to assign the book to be read. And for then a student to declare it is his favorite book, without any political bent....Not buying it, but nice try!

"The Communist Manifesto is, in fact, part of the curriculum in most schools."

In other words that statement is not true!

[BillW]

Ok Jimi - have it your way. The rub, of course, is that he also listed Hitler's book which, by your logic, makes him a right wing zealot. So he is both, according to your resoning, a right wing fanatic and a left wing fanatic based on his book list. Somehow, however, you have concluded that only the left wing book counts. Hmmmm ...

[BillW]

Donald - and here I was thinking the day would never come that you and I would see eye to eye on anything. Goes to show just how wrong I can be ...

[Jimi]

BillW,

I don't see it that way either. I would consider the Nazi's more aligned with today's modern American Progressive Left, then I would the American Right. But I will agree that the Far Right in America has some Nazi Traits.

The point being that if Loughner should be considered to have any political bent it would be on the Left.

[Bill Fleming]

Jimi, the truth is, we don't know anything about the guy. The truth is there is nothing to be gained by trying close the book on this by drawing premature, largely uninformed conclusions. The truth is we need less heat and more light, less talking and more listening. the truth is, we don't have to have an opinion on every single issue. The truth is, there is nothing wrong with being wrong sometimes.

[KB]

Great thread! Thanks to all. I will only add this: I think very little is to be gained by trying to J.L. Loughner on the political spectrum. Whatever planet he was living on, it wasn't the earth. I think Bill's last comment is dead spot on.