Gabrielle Giffords

Understanding why the left are nasty

ŠĒ• RealClearPolitics

The other night Pam Corkery exposed the nastiness of the left, Martyn Bradbury is another and in general the Labour party has well earned the title of the nastiest party in parliament. The left likes to think they are above the nasty, I even got an email the other day from a Labour MP professing all innocence of the nasty game…at the same time threatening to bring on ¬†a war against me.

They really are deluded. It is probably because they have been born and raised into the nasty side of politics:

Given how many more Americans define themselves as conservative rather than as liberal, let alone than as left, how does one explain the success of left-wing policies?

One answer is the appeal of entitlements and a desire to be taken care of. It takes a strong-willed citizen to vote against receiving free benefits. But an even greater explanation is the saturation of Western society by left-wing hate directed at the right. The left’s demonization, personal vilification, and mockery of its opponents have been the most powerful tools in the left-wing arsenal for a century.

Since Stalin labeled Leon Trotsky — the man who was the father of Russian Bolshevism! — a “fascist,” the Left has labeled its ideological opponents evil. And when you control nearly all of the news media and schools, that labeling works.

The liberal media even succeeded in blaming the right wing for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy even though his assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was a pro-Soviet, pro-Castro communist. Similarly, just one day after a deranged man, Jared Loughner, attempted to kill Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and murdered six people in the process, The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote that it was right-wing hate that had provoked Loughner: “It’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence. Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. . . .”

Krugman made it all up. But what matters to most of those who speak for the left is not truth. It is destroying the good name of its opponents. That is the modus operandi of the left.

It works.

If maps kill people…

The screw loose useful idiots of the left wing are desperately trying to prove that a map made someone kill some and therefore the gun was vicariously in Sarah Palins hand.

This is the image they say put the target onto Arizona representative Gabrielle Giffords:

Sarah Palin PAC map

Now to use their correlation, that maps kill people, then we can similarly hold the Democrats responsible for killing their own representative because this mp is from their own Heartland Strategy:

Democrat Heartland Strategy Map

Democrats use "bulls eye" targets extensively in their political graphics. This map shows states Democrats want targeted. Arizona, which Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords represents, is surrounded by these targets.

As you can see the Democrats have “killed” their own with their map. This argument is of course ludicrous but it is the argument that the nutters at The Standard and other left wing sites are trying to pull….that somehow maps cause people to kill and that therefore puts the gun into the hands of the map creator or owner.

We can now re-write the old saying that guns don’t kill people, maps do.

The only person responsible for this terrible killing and attempted assassination is the insane person behind the trigger, no one else. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise. And I don’t even care what his politics are. He is just plain nuts thinking shooting people is going to solve anything.

I know one thing for sure though. He is not a Tea party supporter…in one of his videos he is shooting up and then burning a US flag. Patriots don’t do that…ever.