The “Violent Rhetoric” End Game, Revealed.
At last we see the end game of all the weekend “violent rhetoric” talk from the left.
Several leading House Democrats blamed the inflammatory rhetoric for contributing to the Tucson massacre, while Republicans denounced criticism of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) following the tragedy.
One lawmaker, Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.), has said he would introduce a bill to make it a crime to threaten or incite violence against a federal official.
Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) suggested the Federal Communications Commission was “not working anymore,” adding she would look at ways to better police language on the airwaves. A brick was thrown through a window of Slaughter’s district office last year.
[...]
“What I’d like to see is if we could all get together on both sides of the aisle, Democrats and Republicans, and really talk about what we can do to cool down the country,” Slaughter said. “Part of that has to be what they’re hearing over the airwaves.”
Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.), the third-ranking House Democrat, also referenced Angle’s “Second Amendment” statement from the campaign. “He saw a Second Amendment remedy and that’s what occurred here and there is no way not to make that connection,” Clyburn told the Charleston Post and Courier, referring to the alleged gunman, Jared Lee Loughner.
Progressives seek total control — that is who they are and that is what they do. Every single time you see a progressive politician doing anything in Congress, you can be sure their end goal has nothing to do with extending freedom to each of us but taking freedom away from all of us. Their chief target has always been, and will always be, our freedom of speech.
But it’s not just progressive Democrats who are getting into the speech police act. Some Republicans have gotten the glassy-eyed look of the power-blinded politician and are dipping their toes into dangerous waters as well.
Rep. Peter King, a Republican from New York, is planning to introduce legislation that would make it illegal to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a government official, according to a person familiar with the congressman’s intentions.
If King introduces this bill, it should end his career. I don’t care what else he’s done, if we can’t trust him to safeguard the rights, written in black and white in the Constitution, he’s useless in Congress. That goes for the unnamed Republican in the Senate who wonders if we brutish louts in the hinterlands talk just a little bit too much for their liking. The answer to bad speech is, as the saying goes, more speech. Anyone who tells you different is a thief, no matter who they are. We can expect the reflexive move toward more government power from progressives. Republicans needs to move reflexively in the other direction, else what good are they?
Other Posts of Interest:
- Why Are We Fighting This Battle Again?
- NC Repubs to John McCain: You’re Not the Boss of Me!
- McCain Makes a Judicial Pitch for Conservatives
Category: Free Speech (?)
"….said the senator. “What was too far when Oklahoma City happened is accepted now. There’s been a desensitizing. These town halls and cable TV and talk radio, everybody’s trying to outdo each other.”
So if we are already far exceeding the rhetoric from the time of the OKC bombing, why haven't we had another one of those? How do these people get to be senators…
[...] of them, beginning to realize that narrative is backfiring with the public, are trying to get to the end-game, which is the putting into place their long-desired restrictions on speech, gun-control measures [...]