Any time a police officer is killed in the line of duty it’s a tragedy, but when there are two slayings in quick succession, the anguish is that much more severe.
Late last week, Texas Sheriff’s Deputy Darren Goforth was gunned down at a Houston-area gas station. And then yesterday in northern Illinois, Lt. Joseph Gliniewicz was killed, sparking a manhunt for three suspects.
It’s against this backdrop that Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz (R-Texas) apparently sees an opportunity: the far-right senator wants Americans to blame President Obama, among others, for the brutal gun violence.
“Cops across this country are feeling the assault,” Cruz told reporters after a town hall meeting in Milford, New Hampshire. “They’re feeling the assault from the president, from the top on down as we see, whether it’s in Ferguson or Baltimore, the response of senior officials of the president, of the attorney general, is to vilify law enforcement. That is fundamentally wrong, and it is endangering the safety and security of us all.”
Yesterday, Cruz went further, accusing the president of “silence” on the issue, which the senator described as “completely wrong” and a “manifestation of the divisiveness, the partisanship and of the hostility to law enforcement that has characterized the entire Obama administration.”
The GOP candidate has not yet produced any evidence of the president being hostile towards law enforcement.
Indeed, as a factual matter, Cruz’s rhetoric is simply indefensible. Not only has law enforcement never faced an “assault” from the White House, but the president hasn’t been “silent” at all – Obama personally called Darren Goforth’s wife; he issued a formal statement condemning the killing; and he spoke out against anti-police violence in general, calling it “completely unacceptable.”
Cruz, in other words, is either lying or he has no idea what he’s talking about.
But the Texas Republican isn’t alone in playing a misplaced blame game. When the finger isn’t being pointed at the White House, the right is lashing out at the Black Lives Matter movement, suggesting without proof that BLM activists are somehow responsible for violent attacks on law enforcement.
Can decent people of goodwill agree that exploiting the murders of police officers to score political points is wrong?
Can honest political observers agree that there’s an important difference between occasional criticisms of law enforcement, seeking reforms in the criminal justice system, and being anti-police?
The last time this came up in earnest was in December, when a gunman shot and killed two NYPD officers, prompting Rudy Giuliani, among others, to blame the president, accusing Obama of pushing anti-police “propaganda.” (To date, the president’s critics have failed to point to any actual examples.)
Let’s revisit our coverage from the time, because it’s still difficult to understand such mindless, cold-blooded violence, just as it’s still tempting for some in the political arena to blame their partisan foes.
While everyone will grieve, mourn, and ache in their own way, when someone instinctively thinks, “Perhaps I can use the slaying of police officers to undermine my political rivals,” there is no nobility to their cause. They do their “team” no favors. There is no decency in exploiting murder to advance ideological ends.
It is wrong, it is ugly, and it is incumbent on those who think this way to reflect on what’s become of their moral compass.
There’s also value in having longer memories. In 2008, Jim David Adkisson walked into a Unitarian church in Tennessee, opened fire, and killed two people while wounding seven others. The shooter said he felt compelled to kill liberals because they’re bad for the country, and police later found books written by Fox News hosts in Adkisson’s home.
Was Sean Hannity responsible for these murders? Of course not. Deranged people are capable of horrific acts; their preferred television personalities are not to blame.
A year later, in 2009, Richard Poplawski gunned down three police officers in Pittsburgh. He later said he targeted law enforcement because of the non-existent “Obama gun ban” he’d heard about in conservative media. Were conservative figures who’d carelessly used the ridiculous phrase partially responsible for the death of the three officers? By Ted Cruz’s reasoning, maybe, but in reality, no.
There’s no shortage of related examples. Joe Stack flew an airplane into a building, motivated by anti-government sentiment. Dr. George Tiller’s assassin was motivated by his opposition to abortion rights. The Oklahoma City bombers killed 168 people. How much responsibility do mainstream conservative pundits and politicians carry for these crimes? None.
There was also Cliven Bundy’s dangerous conflict with the Bureau of Land Management – which generated all kinds of support from Republican policymakers and conservative pundits – and which “eventually motivated Jerad and Amanda Miller to kill five people in Las Vegas after participating in the Bundy standoff … declaring, ‘If they’re going to come bring violence to us, well, if that’s the language they want to speak, we’ll learn it.’”
Among the anti-government radicals’ victims? Two police officers who were gunned down by their white assailants in Las Vegas.
Under Ted Cruz’s reasoning, the responsibility for all kinds of violence should apparently be extended to every corner of our political world.
Which is largely why this blame game isn’t worth playing. Tragically, lunatics sometimes commit horrific crimes. When it comes to maintaining a healthy discourse in a free society, let’s not connect their violence to political opinions we may or may not like.
Sang, was the hysteria over banning the Confederate Flag not directly related to the photographs found of Dylann Roof with one?
There has been a major void in intelligent and interesting conservative posts on this site. Fujirich is long gone, and the others here seem to be only interested in trolling. I know this is crazy, but Muleman could easily become the conservative leader here if he chose it. His serious posts are way more interesting than anyone else's here on the right side of the aisle.
Maddow must have forgotten about the shootings where there was an attempt to pin the blame on the Tea Party.
Sang, was the hysteria over banning the Confederate Flag not directly related to the photographs found of Dylann Roof with one?
The two situations are not comparable. The Confederate flag is emblematic of the worst chapter in American history, both for its symbolic honoring of a time when owning human beings was not just condoned but completely institutionalized and exploited for commercial gain, and for the war over this abomination which pitted American against American and resulted in the greatest loss of American life ever in an armed conflict. Forget the smokescreen of "states' rights", this conflict was about keeping the agribusiness machine going with free labor. The effects of this chapter have resonated in American life ever since, with legal and institutional racism and discrimination only seriously addressed in my lifetime. When I was a kid, we would spend summer vacations in Alabama, from where my father was. As a child from Chicago where, in my school in a blue-collar neighborhood I sat next to refugees from Eastern Europe, blacks from the South and people of all stripes, I was amazed to see "Whites Only", "Coloreds Only" signs as we drove around Troy. I saw drinking fountains segregated by race first hand. This is in my lifetime, and I'm still a fair piece from the ground. To imagine that the scars from this should have healed by now and to dismiss the resentment over the flying of this banner from statehouses across the South as "hysteria" is very short-sighted. Imagine if things had been the other way around and the atrocities committed against blacks had been perpetrated against you and yours - how would feel seeing a state-endorsed flag from that era flying over your home ground? Would you be "hysterical" in your desire to see this erased?
[Edited on 9/2/2015 by rmack]
Maddow must have forgotten about the shootings where there was an attempt to pin the blame on the Tea Party.
Guess you missed the final point (as usual):
"Which is largely why this blame game isn’t worth playing. Tragically, lunatics sometimes commit horrific crimes. When it comes to maintaining a healthy discourse in a free society, let’s not connect their violence to political opinions we may or may not like."
Maddow must have forgotten about the shootings where there was an attempt to pin the blame on the Tea Party.
Guess you missed the final point (as usual):
"Which is largely why this blame game isn’t worth playing. Tragically, lunatics sometimes commit horrific crimes. When it comes to maintaining a healthy discourse in a free society, let’s not connect their violence to political opinions we may or may not like."
No, I get the point. I got the point long ago. The blame game isn't worth playing (unless you're a Democrat.) In that case, the blame game is not only worth playing, it's a way of life.
And Rachel Maddow is some kind of expert on healthy discourse? That's pretty funny.
Maddow must have forgotten about the shootings where there was an attempt to pin the blame on the Tea Party.
Guess you missed the final point (as usual):
"Which is largely why this blame game isn’t worth playing. Tragically, lunatics sometimes commit horrific crimes. When it comes to maintaining a healthy discourse in a free society, let’s not connect their violence to political opinions we may or may not like."
No, I get the point. I got the point long ago. The blame game isn't worth playing (unless you're a Democrat.) In that case, the blame game is not only worth playing, it's a way of life.
And Rachel Maddow is some kind of expert on healthy discourse? That's pretty funny.
And you & muledouche are pretty damn pathetic.
Maddow must have forgotten about the shootings where there was an attempt to pin the blame on the Tea Party.
Speaking of the Tea Party, there was a time that you were very sensitive about the entire tea party movement being cast as violent racists when this imagery appeared at rallies of self-described tea partiers...
Now you are doing the same thing that you so bristled against. Not surprised.
Now you are doing the same thing that you so bristled against. Not surprised.
Are you making some comparison between Black Lives Matter and the Tea Party? Wow.
Black Lives Matter is a virtual handbook on How To Undermine Your Own Cause or How To Be Your Own Worst Enemy.
Killing white folks and cops will help improve their situation? We'll see how that works out.
No, I get the point. I got the point long ago. The blame game isn't worth playing (unless you're a Democrat.) In that case, the blame game is not only worth playing, it's a way of life.
My guess is we will have a very hard time finding any political thread on this board that doesn't have at least one post that says something was Obama's fault...... or those damn liberals...... 😛 
My guess is we will have a very hard time finding any political thread on this board that doesn't have at least one post that says something was Obama's fault...... or those damn liberals...... 😛
]
Scapegoating the police and blaming metal objects for murder has consequences...
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423453/black-lives-matter-murder-spike-american-cities
Maddow must have forgotten about the shootings where there was an attempt to pin the blame on the Tea Party.
Guess you missed the final point (as usual):
"Which is largely why this blame game isn’t worth playing. Tragically, lunatics sometimes commit horrific crimes. When it comes to maintaining a healthy discourse in a free society, let’s not connect their violence to political opinions we may or may not like."
No, I get the point. I got the point long ago. The blame game isn't worth playing (unless you're a Democrat.) In that case, the blame game is not only worth playing, it's a way of life.
And Rachel Maddow is some kind of expert on healthy discourse? That's pretty funny.
And you & muledouche are pretty damn pathetic.
_____________________________________________________________________
Well, welfare ron is angry again.
This usually happens early in the month after he has traded his food stamps for dope again.
Sang, was the hysteria over banning the Confederate Flag not directly related to the photographs found of Dylann Roof with one?
The two situations are not comparable. The Confederate flag is emblematic of the worst chapter in American history, both for its symbolic honoring of a time when owning human beings was not just condoned but completely institutionalized and exploited for commercial gain, and for the war over this abomination which pitted American against American and resulted in the greatest loss of American life ever in an armed conflict. Forget the smokescreen of "states' rights", this conflict was about keeping the agribusiness machine going with free labor. The effects of this chapter have resonated in American life ever since, with legal and institutional racism and discrimination only seriously addressed in my lifetime. When I was a kid, we would spend summer vacations in Alabama, from where my father was. As a child from Chicago where, in my school in a blue-collar neighborhood I sat next to refugees from Eastern Europe, blacks from the South and people of all stripes, I was amazed to see "Whites Only", "Coloreds Only" signs as we drove around Troy. I saw drinking fountains segregated by race first hand. This is in my lifetime, and I'm still a fair piece from the ground. To imagine that the scars from this should have healed by now and to dismiss the resentment over the flying of this banner from statehouses across the South as "hysteria" is very short-sighted. Imagine if things had been the other way around and the atrocities committed against blacks had been perpetrated against you and yours - how would feel seeing a state-endorsed flag from that era flying over your home ground? Would you be "hysterical" in your desire to see this erased?
[Edited on 9/2/2015 by rmack]
_______________________________________________________________________
If you believe the drivel you posted you need a lesson in history.
The Civil War was not fought over slavery. The North did not attack The South because of slavery.
The slavery issue was brought in years after the war started by President Lincoln because at the time the war was going badly for The Union.
Many black Southerners donned the Confederate uniform and fought for The South.
The Confederate Flag was made a symbol of slavery by the Democrats purely for political purposes. The left loves their “symbols” when manufactured to push an agenda.
By your logic, the “Rainbow Flag” would be classified as an anti-Christian symbol.
The whole “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” lie became a symbolic chant. That is what evolved into the “Black Lives Matter” racist hate group’s latest symbolic chant and has been embraced and is supported by the Democrats.
Black Lives Matter is openly calling for the killing of Police Officers in general and White Police Officers in particular.
The liberals support the Black Lives Matter militants.
By that, liberals support the killing of Police Officers in general and White Police Officers in particular.
The Civil War was absolutely about slavery. I think you need the history lesson...
"The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union, however, was the debate over the future of slavery. That dispute led to secession, and secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution."
"What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict."
"The Civil War was the culmination of a series of confrontations concerning the institution of slavery."
The Civil War was absolutely about slavery. I think you need the history lesson...
"The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union, however, was the debate over the future of slavery. That dispute led to secession, and secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution."
"What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict."
"The Civil War was the culmination of a series of confrontations concerning the institution of slavery."
Have you been reading books and stuff again?
The Civil War was absolutely about slavery. I think you need the history lesson...
"The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union, however, was the debate over the future of slavery. That dispute led to secession, and secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution."
"What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict."
"The Civil War was the culmination of a series of confrontations concerning the institution of slavery."
Wouldn't matter, he's a pathological liar.
The Civil War was absolutely about slavery. I think you need the history lesson...
"The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union, however, was the debate over the future of slavery. That dispute led to secession, and secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution."
"What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict."
"The Civil War was the culmination of a series of confrontations concerning the institution of slavery."
_____________________________________________________________________
Quoting the NAACP is not exactly the best way to push your false narrative.
Nor does it change the fact that the liberals support the killing of Police Officers.
Sang, was the hysteria over banning the Confederate Flag not directly related to the photographs found of Dylann Roof with one?
The two situations are not comparable. The Confederate flag is emblematic of the worst chapter in American history, both for its symbolic honoring of a time when owning human beings was not just condoned but completely institutionalized and exploited for commercial gain, and for the war over this abomination which pitted American against American and resulted in the greatest loss of American life ever in an armed conflict. Forget the smokescreen of "states' rights", this conflict was about keeping the agribusiness machine going with free labor. The effects of this chapter have resonated in American life ever since, with legal and institutional racism and discrimination only seriously addressed in my lifetime. When I was a kid, we would spend summer vacations in Alabama, from where my father was. As a child from Chicago where, in my school in a blue-collar neighborhood I sat next to refugees from Eastern Europe, blacks from the South and people of all stripes, I was amazed to see "Whites Only", "Coloreds Only" signs as we drove around Troy. I saw drinking fountains segregated by race first hand. This is in my lifetime, and I'm still a fair piece from the ground. To imagine that the scars from this should have healed by now and to dismiss the resentment over the flying of this banner from statehouses across the South as "hysteria" is very short-sighted. Imagine if things had been the other way around and the atrocities committed against blacks had been perpetrated against you and yours - how would feel seeing a state-endorsed flag from that era flying over your home ground? Would you be "hysterical" in your desire to see this erased?
[Edited on 9/2/2015 by rmack]
_______________________________________________________________________
If you believe the drivel you posted you need a lesson in history.
The Civil War was not fought over slavery. The North did not attack The South because of slavery.
The slavery issue was brought in years after the war started by President Lincoln because at the time the war was going badly for The Union.Many black Southerners donned the Confederate uniform and fought for The South.
The Confederate Flag was made a symbol of slavery by the Democrats purely for political purposes. The left loves their “symbols” when manufactured to push an agenda.
By your logic, the “Rainbow Flag” would be classified as an anti-Christian symbol.
The whole “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” lie became a symbolic chant. That is what evolved into the “Black Lives Matter” racist hate group’s latest symbolic chant and has been embraced and is supported by the Democrats.
Black Lives Matter is openly calling for the killing of Police Officers in general and White Police Officers in particular.
The liberals support the Black Lives Matter militants.
By that, liberals support the killing of Police Officers in general and White Police Officers in particular.
Dude that's ridiculous. Lincoln was elected on an anti-slavery platform and pledged to restrict the spread of slavery to the territories. The Southern States said they would secede if Lincoln was elected. Lincoln was elected and they seceded. The war was fought to end the rebellion. The war was entirely about slavery.
True it did not start out with the purpose of entirely ending slavery. That purpose evolved as the war went on. But to say the war was not about slavery is patently untrue.
Sang, was the hysteria over banning the Confederate Flag not directly related to the photographs found of Dylann Roof with one?
The two situations are not comparable. The Confederate flag is emblematic of the worst chapter in American history, both for its symbolic honoring of a time when owning human beings was not just condoned but completely institutionalized and exploited for commercial gain, and for the war over this abomination which pitted American against American and resulted in the greatest loss of American life ever in an armed conflict. Forget the smokescreen of "states' rights", this conflict was about keeping the agribusiness machine going with free labor. The effects of this chapter have resonated in American life ever since, with legal and institutional racism and discrimination only seriously addressed in my lifetime. When I was a kid, we would spend summer vacations in Alabama, from where my father was. As a child from Chicago where, in my school in a blue-collar neighborhood I sat next to refugees from Eastern Europe, blacks from the South and people of all stripes, I was amazed to see "Whites Only", "Coloreds Only" signs as we drove around Troy. I saw drinking fountains segregated by race first hand. This is in my lifetime, and I'm still a fair piece from the ground. To imagine that the scars from this should have healed by now and to dismiss the resentment over the flying of this banner from statehouses across the South as "hysteria" is very short-sighted. Imagine if things had been the other way around and the atrocities committed against blacks had been perpetrated against you and yours - how would feel seeing a state-endorsed flag from that era flying over your home ground? Would you be "hysterical" in your desire to see this erased?
[Edited on 9/2/2015 by rmack]
_______________________________________________________________________
If you believe the drivel you posted you need a lesson in history.
The Civil War was not fought over slavery. The North did not attack The South because of slavery.
The slavery issue was brought in years after the war started by President Lincoln because at the time the war was going badly for The Union.Many black Southerners donned the Confederate uniform and fought for The South.
The Confederate Flag was made a symbol of slavery by the Democrats purely for political purposes. The left loves their “symbols” when manufactured to push an agenda.
By your logic, the “Rainbow Flag” would be classified as an anti-Christian symbol.
The whole “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” lie became a symbolic chant. That is what evolved into the “Black Lives Matter” racist hate group’s latest symbolic chant and has been embraced and is supported by the Democrats.
Black Lives Matter is openly calling for the killing of Police Officers in general and White Police Officers in particular.
The liberals support the Black Lives Matter militants.
By that, liberals support the killing of Police Officers in general and White Police Officers in particular.
Also the North did not attack the South. The South attacked a federal fort. That is what began the war.
The Civil War was absolutely about slavery. I think you need the history lesson...
"The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union, however, was the debate over the future of slavery. That dispute led to secession, and secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution."
"What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict."
"The Civil War was the culmination of a series of confrontations concerning the institution of slavery."
_____________________________________________________________________
Quoting the NAACP is not exactly the best way to push your false narrative.
Nor does it change the fact that the liberals support the killing of Police Officers.
I didn't quote the NAACP - and your second statement again shows just what a trollish clown you are. You don't seem to have any clue what a fact is......
My guess is we will have a very hard time finding any political thread on this board that doesn't have at least one post that says something was Obama's fault...... or those damn liberals...... 😛
]
Once again missing the point....... I made that statement, not Obama....... you and mule have lost any credibility you had here (you had some, he didn't)
Perhaps some introspective and respectable Black leaders need to emerge and start their own movement. One that will serve as a counterbalance to the dangerous and self-destructive Black Lives Matter movement.
A movement called Black Behavior Matters....
You are such an angry bitter person. I hope you don't own a gun! To point out the obvious, your counter movement would be just as idiotic according to your own logic. Doesn't all behavior matter?
The Civil War was absolutely about slavery. I think you need the history lesson...
"The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union, however, was the debate over the future of slavery. That dispute led to secession, and secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution."
"What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict."
"The Civil War was the culmination of a series of confrontations concerning the institution of slavery."
_____________________________________________________________________
Quoting the NAACP is not exactly the best way to push your false narrative.
Nor does it change the fact that the liberals support the killing of Police Officers.
I didn't quote the NAACP - and your second statement again shows just what a trollish clown you are. You don't seem to have any clue what a fact is......
_____________________________________________________________________
And of course you don't say from where you cut and pasted your lies.
When did the liberals dump their conscience, morals and soul for a political agenda?
When did the liberals dump their conscience, morals and soul for a political agenda?
Why do you pollute this site with your hate and garbage?
The only thing that differs between you and our long banned psycho dean long is that you haven't yet pasted gay porn pics here.
When did the liberals dump their conscience, morals and soul for a political agenda?
Why do you pollute this site with your hate and garbage?
The only thing that differs between you and our long banned psycho dean long is that you haven't yet pasted gay porn pics here.
___________________________________________________________________
Why are you too lazy to get a job and stop sucking off the tax-payers?
