Counter-counter response about Arizona
Jesse Pyle wrote a counter-response to my response of his letter Thursday. While I would prefer not to write a counter-counter response in The Post, as the utility would be small and it’d annoy rather than spark interest, I feel I should make a few passing comments. His letter lacked additional substance while highlighting a weak original argument. Purporting to abstain from placing blame, then expecting that conservatives “force Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh to sit down [and] scale back the anger,” still implicitly blames conservatives for “angry rhetoric.”
“Angry rhetoric” did not stir the Arizona shooting. The instability of the shooter caused the Arizona shooting. A climate of anger in politics does not exist. It is a convenient narrative when a liberal resides in the White House to explain away dissent as illogical and irrational, but it lacks empirical evidence. Nate Kelly has done a wonderful job of highlighting this over the past few days in case anyone has forgotten comparisons of Bush to Hitler and Satan, and George Will has an illuminating article in the Washington Post.
Of course, when a conservative controls the White House, dissent and criticism are patriotic and necessary; otherwise, it’s dangerous and treasonous.