“Fear, Loathing, and Top Down Violence”

By William L. Garvin

“Public affairs go pretty much as usual: perpetual chicanery and rather more personal abuse than there used to be.” John Adams

There is an air of desperation permeating Democrat attempts to paint the opposition in general and the Tea Party in specific as extreme. What is extreme is the depths to which they and their media minions have sunk in attempting to divert attention from the $3.52 trillion in spending last year and the $3.45 trillion in spending this year which has the federal debt now at a staggering $13 trillion!

It was almost comical when Janet Napolitano suggested that we should be concerned about our military veterans as potential terrorists. Never one to ignore a Democrat talking point, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, in her phantasmagorical alternate reality, tried to connect the dots between Timothy McVeigh, Christian evangelicals, and the Tea Party. Of course, it was necessary to ignore the fact that McVeigh was a self-avowed atheist who professed that politics was his religion.

Her MSNBC counterpart, Chris Mathews (who used to have momentary flashes of lucidity) seems to have gone even further over the edge. He actually used the Chilean mine rescue miracle to spew his personal venom. He pontificated that if the miners were from the Tea Party they would have “…been killing each other after about two days”! In his interview with Richard Trumka of the AFL-CIO, he continued his foolishness: “The message coming out of the Tea Party people…is every man for himself. Basically no more taxes, no more government, no more everything. No more safety net. No more health care for everybody. Everybody just get out there, make your buck, save it, screw the government, move on.” Given his cartoonish characterization, it is only appropriate to quote Bugs Bunny: “What a maroon!” Either Mathews is criminally ignorant and unable to conduct even basic research or he is deliberately lying.

In a compelling essay, Whitney Pitcher pointed out that “Such misrepresentation of the Tea Party movement has become common place among the liberal press. The Tea Party is not about no government, it’s about limited government. It is not about an ‘every man for himself’ mentality; it’s about the voluntary generosity of individuals rather than the obligatory redistribution of wealth. It’s about everyday Americans, not the political elite or the Establishment.” One would think the cocktail party, Ivy League-educated, ruling class would be able to figure that one out.

What is even more troubling is the continuing violence in the Democrat demagoguery. When Governor Sanford was missing, the esteemed Senator John Kerry said “Too bad if a governor had to go missing it couldn’t have been the governor of Alaska. You know, Sarah Palin.” New Hampshire Democrat State Rep. Timothy Horrigan said “Well a dead Palin would be even more dangerous than a live one….” Thankfully he resigned after demonstrating his terminal stupidity. Keith Halloran , a Democrat candidate named for the same House, commented on a thread regarding the plane crash that killed Alaska Senator Ted Stevens “Just wish Sarah and Levy(sic) were on board.”

Where do they get the idea that this sort of invective is permissible? Maybe it’s from a President who says that “if they bring a knife, we’ll bring a gun” and encourages his followers to “get in the faces” of the Tea Party and town hall protesters. Maybe it’s when the President says there’s going to be “hand to hand combat.” Maybe it’s when the Vice-President says he’ll “strangle” the next Republican who talks about balancing the federal budget. Maybe it’s when Oliver Stone makes a movie about assassinating a living president. Maybe it’s when main stream media continue to repeat lies from left wing blogs with no semblance of objectivity. Maybe it’s when Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals calls for “picking a target, freezing it, personalizing it, and polarizing it.” For community organizers following these principles, facts are irrelevant and truth is the first casualty.

Of course you can say that these are just isolated examples and are not representative of Democrats as a whole. Nonetheless, if you want more “civil discourse,” you should repudiate this type of extreme rhetorical violence within your own ranks. It’s not working and the Tea Party movement is not intimidated.