Soldier Murdered At Recruiting Office

June 2nd, 2009 By: Arvak | Tags:

shoot_officersA military recruiter in Little Rock has been murdered, apparently as a result of “political and religious motives” by an Islamic extremist.

If we were to follow the same pseudo-logic used by many on the left after yesterday’s murder of an abortion doctor by a Christian extremist, then we would have to conclude that all Muslims and/or all anti-war people were complicit in this murder because they held a few similar political views as the murderer. And, of course, any such conclusion would be idiotic. But don’t expect the left-leaning blogosphere to admit to the obvious parallels here.

Fact is that murder in the service of a political cause is terrorism and is morally reprehensible. That means that murder in the service of opposing abortion is reprehensible and murder in the course of anti-war extremism is reprehensible. And it is clear from these back-to-back tragedies that neither left nor right nor Muslims nor Christians nor black nor white have any kind of monopoly on murderous political extremism. The image to the above left shows that this murderer had similar “demonizing” anti-war rhetoric available to him as the anti-abortion extremist had with regards to his issue. There is no monopoly on “demonization” on right or left either. Say Anything pounds this point home:

Now, not to use this tragedy for politics or anything, but we could jump to the conclusion that this man was motivated by a hatred for the military (or something along those lines) and then blame groups like Code Pink and Media Matters and MoveOn.org for fanning anti-military, anti-Iraq war passions for years. We could, much as the left has with people like Bill O’Reilly in the George Tiller murder claim that those groups have blood on their hands.

But we won’t. Because that’s stupid. This murder, whatever the motivation (it’s not clear at this point), was committed by a murderous thug who acted of his own volition. Not because he was compelled to by liberal dissent.

Indeed, the only constant here is extremism itself — it is extremism that convinces its adherents that they transcend normal moral boundaries. It is extremism that convinces its adherents that they must take violent action in order to counter a demonic threat on the other side. And it is extremist sympathies that causes otherwise well-intentioned people to try to cover up, change the subject, redirect blame, and otherwise interfere with what should be broad condemnations against the perpetrators of such travesties.

So let’s stop with the partisan left/right finger-pointing in the service of petty partisan vendettas and start calling out and isolating the extremists from both left and right. When liberals find themselves able to condemn left-leaning extremists with the same vigor they condemn extreme rightists (and vice-versa), maybe there will be some hope for a return to real political debates and fewer opportunistic “gotcha” moments.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Jay_C
    June 2nd, 2009 at 14:23
    Reply | Quote | #1

    “If we were to follow the same pseudo-logic used by many on the left after yesterday’s murder of an abortion doctor by a Christian extremist, then we would have to conclude that all Muslims and/or all anti-war people were complicit in this murder because they held a few similar political views as the murderer. And, of course, any such conclusion would be idiotic. But don’t expect the left-leaning blogosphere to admit to the obvious parallels here.”

    Agreed, and where is the outrage on this issue from he left? The abortion clinic blog entry on this site had 69 comments last I checked, while this one seems like an echo chamber at the moment. While some on the left would say, “sure, any killing is bad” or some off the cuff comment that anyone would agree on, where is the same outrage and seething on this killing as with the abortion clinc doctor? I expect I will hear crickets…

  2. Jason Arvak
    June 2nd, 2009 at 14:35
    Reply | Quote | #2

    I’ve been watching Memeorandum pretty closely for the reaction from the leftist blogosphere. So far, it is pretty much in accord with your prediction — crickets. On the few leftist sites that are commenting, the dominant meme seems to be the flatly dishonest claim that conservatives were “cheering” the abortion doctor murder while decrying the recruiting office murder.

    In short, the left appears to be choosing between only two options: silence or lying.

    And, of course, the faux moderate blogosphere is meekly honoring the leftists’ choice.

  3. Doomed
    June 2nd, 2009 at 15:03
    Reply | Quote | #3

    As time passes. People will begin to realize the agenda that the FAR left has is Fascist.

    The problem right now is that the moderates are not speaking out. They are enjoying being in power and it will only be when the excesses become so visual that they have no recourse but to speak up that they will finally begin making themselves known.

    Remember that GWB had solid support for about 5 years. It was only until the obvious could no longer be contained that the moderates began speaking up and making their displeasure known.

    I rather suspect this is the case now. The moderates are silent. Reveling in power and unwilling to see the writing on the wall until its too late.

    Exactly as the moderate Republicans did with Bush.

    In conclusion….it is not the far right that will negate the far left. It is the moderate left that will negate the far left…..just as happened in the GOP in 2005-2009

  4. Jay_C
    June 2nd, 2009 at 19:02
    Reply | Quote | #4

    The far lefts lack of response to this killing leads me to beleive that their so-caled “caring, compassion and empathy / sympathy for life” is not their highest concern for most issues involving the loss of life, for if it was about “caring and compassion and empathy and sympathy for life”, their ferocity against killing this innocent recruiter would provoke just as much outrage. I can therefore only conclude that as far as the far left is concerend if an issue fits their agenda, they clamor and claw and bite to whichever side fits the agenda.

  5. Jeb
    June 2nd, 2009 at 21:18
    Reply | Quote | #5

    Indeed, the only constant here is extremism itself — it is extremism that convinces its adherents that they transcend normal moral boundaries. It is extremism that convinces its adherents that they must take violent action in order to counter a demonic threat on the other side. And it is extremist sympathies that causes otherwise well-intentioned people to try to cover up, change the subject, redirect blame, and otherwise interfere with what should be broad condemnations against the perpetrators of such travesties.

    So let’s stop with the partisan left/right finger-pointing in the service of petty partisan vendettas and start calling out and isolating the extremists from both left and right. When liberals find themselves able to condemn left-leaning extremists with the same vigor they condemn extreme rightists (and vice-versa), maybe there will be some hope for a return to real political debates and fewer opportunistic “gotcha” moments.

    Agreed.

    In short, the left appears to be choosing between only two options: silence or lying.

    And, of course, the faux moderate blogosphere is meekly honoring the leftists’ choice.

    to that I would say,

    So let’s stop with the partisan left/right finger-pointing in the service of petty partisan vendettas

  6. Jason Arvak
    June 2nd, 2009 at 21:57
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Jeb,

    I’ll gladly back off when the hordes of rote-talking-point-spewing leftists stop showing up to pollute and change the subject and play gotcha and otherwise insult the intelligence, integrity, honesty, and humanity of everyone they disagree with.

    But I tire of playing the sucker in the left-dominated blogosphere.

  7. Jeb
    June 2nd, 2009 at 22:10
    Reply | Quote | #7

    I’ll gladly back off when the hordes of rote-talking-point-spewing leftists stop showing up to pollute and change the subject and play gotcha and otherwise insult the intelligence, integrity, honesty, and humanity of everyone they disagree with.

    The same happens on both sides and both sides rationalize the continuation of the status quo by pointing to the other side. You have rightly pointed out that this divisive and distracting commentary poisons the well and serves no good end. Participating in demonizing one side over the other only serves to help continue this unhealthy trend.
    Your earlier argument that I excerpted above accurately depicts the problem. Your later comments detract from that argument by choosing to demonize one side.

  8. Jay_C
    June 3rd, 2009 at 04:18
    Reply | Quote | #8

    Jeb, so how do you suggest the left and or the right should be called to task on issues that most left see as issues and most right see as issues? I can honestly say that the right has as of now, taken the time to explain or at the very least appologise for some of their actions in the past. Weather you agree with them or not is irrelavant, they are talking about it. I cannot say the same for the left and their current actions. From the left, (in the media and those in power) all I see is avoidance of answering questions from the right, and laughing questions off. These are all generalizations I know, but there are just too many of these instances for it to be considered. Comments like, “Don’t pay attention to YouTube snippets” regarding certain supreme court apointees, and the jokes about the “teabagging” we saw over and over again on MSNBC and CNN. Real questions, about real issues, need to be answered, and if we learned anything from the past 8 years it is that it needs to stop. Just because “they did it for the past 8 years” doesn’t give the current administration a free pass to do the same thing, but for different reasons.

    The only way to bring up issues and get attention is to get a little feisty, and yes, and perhaps even a little rude. But legitimate questions (regardless of their tone) should not be ignored,and I am seeing nothing but ignorance from those currently in power and those in mainstream media at the moment.

  9. Jay_C
    June 3rd, 2009 at 04:28
    Reply | Quote | #9

    Oh, and just keep you all up to speed..
    94 comments as of now regarding the Abortion clinic doctor murder ,and 9 Comments here (including this one) regarding the Recruiting Office Murder. No bias there.. no, none at all. I guess we are just loony to care as much about the poor soul here and the ramifications of this murder as the left does about the abortion clinic murder.

  10. Jeb
    June 3rd, 2009 at 07:34

    Jeb, so how do you suggest the left and or the right should be called to task on issues that most left see as issues and most right see as issues?

    Honestly, respectfully, and without hyperbole. I know that’s a rarity so I hope for at least 2 out of 3 most of the time and am prepared to be disappointed often.

    I can honestly say that the right has as of now, taken the time to explain or at the very least appologise for some of their actions in the past. Weather you agree with them or not is irrelavant, they are talking about it. I cannot say the same for the left and their current actions.

    Could you be more specific?

    Comments like, “Don’t pay attention to YouTube snippets” regarding certain supreme court apointees,

    I haven’t seen the you tube snippet in question. I have read the full quote I think you are referencing and do know where, when, and for whom it was given. If the you tube snippet contains most or all of her comments it would be instructive and should not be ignored. If however the snippet is the one sentence or part of that sentence pulled out of context then it is worse than useless.

    and the jokes about the “teabagging” we saw over and over again on MSNBC and CNN.

    It was an obvious joke and one that anyone under 40 should have known would be picked up by every late night comic. It was just bad optics and a poor understanding of youth culture that lead to that particular bit of ridicule.
    That does not excuse those jokes on what are supposed to be news shows or serious commentary. If that was done on what should be news shows it is awful and yet another example of why I rarely watch TV news. They are typically juvenile (this would be an example), focus on trivia at the expense of real news, and all opinion must be outrage. Unfortunately when news has to compete with entertainment this is what happens.

    Real questions, about real issues, need to be answered, and if we learned anything from the past 8 years it is that it needs to stop. Just because “they did it for the past 8 years” doesn’t give the current administration a free pass to do the same thing, but for different reasons.

    That is certainly true. Obama’s backpeddling on detainee treatment, particularly in the case of the Uighars is reprehensible and he should be called to task for it. He is slow to let go of the powers that were grabbed by the executive over the past 8 years. He campaigned against them and needs to be called to task for failing to follow through.

    But legitimate questions (regardless of their tone) should not be ignored

    No, but too abrasive a tone will ensure that all you are doing is preaching to the choir.

    I am seeing nothing but ignorance from those currently in power and those in mainstream media at the moment.

    No matter the time or the place, if you look in that direction that is likely what you will see.

    94 comments as of now regarding the Abortion clinic doctor murder ,and 9 Comments here (including this one) regarding the Recruiting Office Murder. No bias there.. no, none at all.

    I believe the bias is toward the hot button issue. I would be willing to bet that every time abortion comes up the comment tally goes up.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.