Total Drek

Or, the thoughts of several frustrated intellectuals on Sociology, Gaming, Science, Politics, Science Fiction, Religion, and whatever the hell else strikes their fancy. There is absolutely no reason why you should read this blog. None. Seriously. Go hit your back button. It's up in the upper left-hand corner of your browser... it says "Back." Don't say we didn't warn you.

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

News Flash: Hateful assholes spew hate, behave like assholes.

By now pretty much everyone in the western hemisphere is aware that Gabrielle Giffords was attacked at an event for her constituents in Tucson. Like most reasonable adults, I am truly sorry for the victims of this tragedy. Likewise, while I am in agreement with the many individuals who seem to think that this is a wakeup call about violent political rhetoric, I also agree that this is probably not the time to propose weird new legislation restricting speech. I also do not think it's appropriate to blame all this on Sarah Palin, although her recent attempts to claim that her crosshairs add was- in reality- just using surveyors' symbology is disingenuous and, frankly, insulting. Be that as it may, I have nonetheless been fascinated to watch the evolving coverage over at Conservapedia, and think you might be interested too. Now, allow me to emphasize: this is an evolving story and, so, the below screenshots are just one stage. A transitional form, if you will, in the developing and reality-warping spin that inevitably appears at Conservapedia. The screenshots are for reference- see below them for the real meat of the post.





Now, I'm going to do this in chronological order, which is basically opposite that represented above. So, you know, don't get confused.

It all started simply. Following a pretty decent, purely factual report of the event, things started to warp:

The suspect in the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords is a 22-year-old young mass murderer who is "left wing, quite liberal," according to a high school and college classmate, as reported by MSNBC. The murderer had publicly declared that The Communist Manifesto is one of his favorite books. [emphasis original]


So, right out of the gate, they're accusing the shooter of being a liberal, at least partly because the Communist Manifesto is one of his favorite books. This is pretty hilarious, actually, since their source also indicates that one of his favorite books was Animal Farm, which is on Conservapedia's list of Greatest Conservative Novels:



So, you know... oops. Then, we see the inevitable defense of Sarah Palin:

A leftist goes on a murdering rampage and ... Sarah Palin is blamed for it: "Gabrielle Giffords' Shooting And Sarah Palin's Conscience." [emphasis original]


Because, really, Sarah Palin is what's important right now. Things get even less newsworthy thereafter:

The suspected gunman in the massacre Saturday that killed 6 and left a congresswoman in critical condition had previously been charged with a drug-related offense, and endorsed a video depicting the burning of the American flag. [emphasis original]


Ah, right, see? Everyone who burns a flag in a YouTube video should just be rounded up and shot in the mouth. From here, we return to a major theme:

The alleged gunman is "Described by Classmate as 'Left-Wing Pothead,'" but the lamestream media conceals the likelihood that he was high on drugs shortly before or during his killing rampage. Instead, liberals falsely blame the Tea Party Movement. [emphasis original]


Okay, so now he's a liberal AND a pothead. And, yeah, how could anyone be suspicious of these guys? From there, we return to the marijuana issue:

The alleged gunman reportedly "had been rejected by the US Army after failing a drug test," yet liberals remain in denial that he had likely been on marijuana before committing his heinous crime. Where are the results of a drug test on him? [emphasis original]


Ah, yes. Clearly there's a conspiracy afoot to cover up his use of marijuana because... why, exactly?

A reason why liberals deny or downplay the marijuana habit of Jared Loughner: they recently pushed to legalize "medical marijuana" in Arizona. [emphasis original]


...what? Is that... serious? Why yes, I think it is! Never mind the obvious question: why did the crazy person have a gun? Clearly, that isn't worth wondering about at all. Instead, become interested in this:

Democrat Group Using Gifford’s Shooting For Fundraiser! [emphasis original]


Which is hardly surprising since a Democrat got shot and Democrats are generally more favorable towards gun control. I agree, however: too soon. Then there's this:

Asked "why many in the United States target the entire Arab world in reference to the 9/11 terrorist attack," Hillary Clinton replied, "We have extremists in my country" and then describes as an "extremist" the 22-year-old left-wing pothead charged with Saturday's massacre.


Right. Left-wing? Check! Pothead? Check! Confusing maybe swipe at Hillary Clinton? Check! The gang's all here! Who else can we castigate?

The Tucson gunman had classes influenced by the Small Schools Workshop. Prior to dropping out of high school, Jared Lee Loughner attended Mountain View High School, part of Arizona's Morana Unified School District and since 2003 part of the Smaller Learning Communities, an offshoot of a group founded in part by Weather Underground William Ayers. And the left wants to blame Loughner's rampage on Sarah Palin? The Tea Party? George W. Bush? [emphasis original]


Oh, right, Bill Ayers. Of course! And it's spelled Marana, with an "A," you feckless jackasses. Is there anyone else we can blame?

The massacre attributed to nihilist Jared Loughner demonstrates that atheism poses the biggest threat of all to a free society.
In New Jersey, atheistic vandalism defaces the "God is" billboard outside the Lincoln Tunnel.
In May 2010, shortly after a demand to remove a Cross from the Mojave National Preserve failed in a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, atheistic vandalism broke the law by stealing and presumably destroying the Cross instead.
[emphasis original]


Ah, yes, of course. Atheists. Random gunman who is of uncertain political or religious persuasion attacks a politician and, all of a sudden, he's a left-wing, pothead atheist who is, apparently, the greatest danger to society ever. I'm glad we straightened all that out.

"It took an entire day before someone reacted by proposing new, horrible legislation" in Congress. So writes the left-leaning Slate in repudiating legislation introduced by a Democrat in the wake of Saturday's massacre. [emphasis original]


The nerve! A left-wing publication criticizing a Democrat? When will they learn good Conservative spin discipline? Wow, can we get any more mileage out of this tragedy, Conservapeons?

Predictably, the liberal New York Times seizes the moment to demand that Congress pass gun control, and criticizes the self-defense approach taken by two congressmen who announced they will carry guns for their own protection. But almost no politicians are demanding gun control because they know voters saw and rejected the same argument after the Columbine massacre. [emphasis original]


I mean, hell, where does the New York Times get off? I mean, sure, Giffords was pro-gun and in an open-carry state when she and a bunch of others were attacked, but that doesn't mean that distributing guns even more widely can't work! And shame on the New York Times for trying to get political mileage out of this tragedy- unlike Conservapedia! Quick, can we smear anyone else?

Radical, leftist punk rock band "Anti-Flag" may have been a major inspiration to Jared Loughner:
Predictably, however, members of the left claim it was speech from the right that caused Loughner's actions, and they want to control it: [emphasis original]


YES! It was the fault of left-wing, pothead, atheist, musicians! Woot! Okay, let's bring it all home, folks:

Democrat Congressman Robert Brady wants a ban on using language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening. The question for Brady then, would this ban be applied your fellow Democrats such as Barack Obama? Would he be prosecuted for the language he used in the videos here: [emphasis original]


Yee-haa! A way to tie the whole damned thing to Obama! Besides, in the wake of this tragedy, if we refrain from being as threatening as we want, we're letting the terrorists win!

So, to sum up: the right did absolutely nothing wrong, this is all the fault of the left, and the left is conspiring to hide their responsibility.

Well, at least someone is reacting with class, I guess:




UPDATE: Since I wrote the above the Conservapeons have not rested, adding several more headlines to the mix:



First,* amazingly enough, the Conservapeons found a way to spread their rage yet further:

Wikipedia's entry about Jared Loughner avoids any discussion of his nihilism, the highly destructive form of atheism, adding to our list of Examples of Bias in Wikipedia. [emphasis original]


Ah, so, now Wikipedia is part of the grand conspiracy to cover up the left's responsibility for this tragedy. Just how deep does this rabbit hole go, crazy people? And since when is nihilism a "form of atheism"? I mean, hell, if you ask me, most forms of Christianity are nihilistic.** Really, it's not a philosophical state that is unique to atheists. But hey, at least now we've established that the responsible parties are left-wing pothead nihilistic atheist musicians. Moving along, let's go ahead and wrap up by devouring our own tails:

Faced with the fact that Jared Loughner is an atheist, Jon Stewart instead tells his atheistic audience that Loughner was "crazy". And should commentators who might influence an atheist like Loughner be blamed for what he did? Nope, claims Stewart. [emphasis original]


And that's just wonderful, really, because Conservapedia has managed to get from a place where it was defending Sarah Palin's crosshairs ad as clearly not to blame to claiming that commentators are actually to blame if they helped produce or nurture Loughner's hypothetical atheism.***

Who needs a funhouse mirror when you have Conservapedia?


* I should note that, while I don't talk about it (although it's captured in this last screenshot), the Conservapeons inserted a headline reading, "Soros-funded dope lobby in damage control over shootings" amidst their earlier coverage. Truly, this tragedy is being used to smear everyone that the Conservapeons don't like.

** Yes, I am in fact aware that nobody asked me.

*** I say hypothetical atheism because, thus far, all that's really clear about this guy is that he's crazy.

Labels: , , ,

1 Comments:

Blogger scripto said...

According to a friend Loughner stopped drinking and smoking dope sometime around 2008. He started to completely dissociate shortly thereafter. Sounds like he was self medicating before his mental illness worsened. We should be having a dialogue about keeping weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill rather than this bullshit misdirection about hate speech.

Friday, January 14, 2011 8:34:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter