Tragedy And Rhetoric
I've been slow to post on this, for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, I just haven't felt like posting much since Thursday. But today, I've been walking around without crutches most of the day (except for stairs), and I took the bandage off without incident. The hydrocodone has helped, although it's contributed to an excess of sleep. Speaking of hydrocodone, I'll be right back.
All better now.
Now, onto the topic at hand. I'm really getting tired of people whining about the political rhetoric, as if we can blame political speech for the horrific tragedy committed by a crazy lunatic in Tucson. I have to admit, one of my first thoughts (after the horror set in) was a fear for how this would affect political discourse; and particularly a fear of the blame that was bound to be attached to the right wing (she is, after all, a Democrat). I was preparing my stock response, "You can't blame what this guy did on political metaphors."
Knowing that he was actually upset with her for not being far left enough, my stock response is still appropriate. We cannot blame the actions of crazy people on the metaphorical turns of phrase expounded by those who may hold some sort of political similarities. We don't get to blame Obama for this guy, we don't to blame Algore for the nutcase at the Discovery Channel, we don't get to blame Limbaugh for Oklahoma City, and we don't get to blame Bill O'Reilly for the guy who shot the abortion doctor.
To do so would require some sort of legal standard to determine a number of things. We'd have to somehow quantify similarity of thought (unless you want to hold a leftwing nutjobs actions against a political antagonist) as well as correlation. Did this guy go crazy after reading Al Gore's book, after listening to Obama's speech, or maybe after reading Paul Krugman's column? I'm not smart enough to be able to think of a legal standard that wouldn't completely destroy free political speech as we know it.
Whether the rhetoric under discussion is something God will hold them accountable for is something different entirely. Personally, I think He will hold us accountable for our slanders, lies, and half-truths. He will hold us accountable for our exaggerations and intentional misquotes.
No matter how inappropriate the post-tragedy rhetoric (name your tragedy, there's been rhetoric to follow), or how vitriolic the pre-tragedy rhetoric, it's just not helpful to blame it for the tragedy.
The “stretch run” for Obama’s health care plan
The passing of Ted Kennedy seems to have given the Democrats new resolve to pass Obamacare. And generally, they are trying to be careful not to overtly try to capitalize off of his death. Still, I believe that many people will see through the obviously adult scripted remarks given Teddy’s grandson to read at the funeral eulogy as being another contrived episode like the unusually erudite 11 year old girl’s question to Obama at one of his health care town hall meetings.
Â
While subtlety is the order of the day for some on the left, others are allowing the mask to slip a bit. Like Senate majority leader Reid, who told interviewers that he believed Kennedy’s death would help them pass the health care legislation. Still others, like former Vice President Al Gore, are appealing to morality; citing Matthews Gospel and declaring, “The country has a moral duty to pass health care reform-This Year!â€. For his part, former President Clinton, like many other Democrats, is trying to rally the party faithful and downplaying the furor of the people at town hall fora during August;
 “You need to back these congressmen and let them know you’re not going to let them be steamrollered by a bunch of people who have been frightened,†Clinton said, in reference to the town hall tumult of the last few weeks. “Don’t let anybody tell you that President Obama wants to ration health care. We are rationing health care in America.â€
People who’ve been frightened? Shouldn’t he instead speak of people who’ve actually learned what is in the bill, what it will ultimately cost in dollars as well as in quality of American health care? It’s fascinating to watch the masters of fear-mongering, who regularly accused Republicans of plotting to cut medicare, and who are planning to do so themselves, intead accuse rank and file people across America with being scared into action, once again, by the Republicans.
What’s even more fascinating is the to-the-wall effort being expended; the usual, “by any means necessary†approach. The New York Times has put aside any pretense by calling for the “nuclear†option of simple majority vote in the Senate; an act of parlimentary prestidigitation that would reveal Obama’s post-partisan demagoguery as the palaver it really is. Still others are reaching for an old standby, the race card; such as Congresswoman Watson who insists that Obamacare opponents, “are trying to destroy the first President who looks like me!â€. But the most often employed measure, one that has worked most effectively in the past, is to have the Democrat’s allies in the MSM basically non-report on the contents of the actual legislation, scream breathlessly that the Republicans are not willing to play nice with Obama, and desperately hope that any actual reporting being done on the bill gets as little exposure as possible; like the fact’s uncovered by Freddoso and confirmed by the CRS that Obamacare will cover illegal immigrants!
But, all of this is just another number in what has become familiar Kabuki Theater. It’s not a question of, “ifâ€, the Democrats will try to capitalize off of Ted Kennedy’s death, but only “how†they will try to do so. The only real question that remains is what will they call it?  Obamacare, as has come into popular editorial usage, ChapiquiddiCare, as Ace likes to refer to it, or, maybe, KopechneCare…
UPDATE: Andrew Breitbart weighs in on what is hopefully the end of the MSM's cover for America's royalty.




