House of Eratosthenes

A man stormed into the State Democratic Party Headquarters and critically shot party chair Bill Gwatney. Gwatney died hours later. According to the the Arkansas Times the man may have been a former employee of Mr. Gwatney’s body shop and was recently let go.
:
The following description appeared in the Arkansas Times.

Arkansas State Democratic Party Chair Bill Gwatney was shot and critically wounded at State Democratic Party Headquarters on Capitol Avenue about 11:50 a.m. today, witnesses at the scene said.
:
Police may have picked up the shooter’s trail because he threatened someone with a gun nearby. Reports were that a man with a gun confronted a building manager in the Arkansas Baptist State Convention office building a few blocks east of Democratic headquarters and said he’d lost his job. This apparently was not long before the shooting. He pointed the gun, but didn’t shoot. He fled in a vehicle whose description may have been reported to police.

Gwatney, a former state senator, was an executive in a car dealership group, a business in which employment changes are not uncommon. Rumors immediately arose that the shooter might have been a disgruntled former employee of a Gwatney dealership. There were layoffs at a Gwatney dealership this week, according to employees.

The rumors about the car-dealership association between the two men have now been denied. One Police Lt. Terry Hastings is quoted as saying, “This is one of those things we may never know,” regarding the gunman’s motive.

Regarding the liberal attempts to blame conservatives, you can go anywhere. To the Webloggin link above, to Cassy’s spot, to Michelle Malkin, Democratic Underground, and DailyKos (“Please god, let them find RW stuff in the perp’s house”).

I found out from this incident that it has become popular among lefties to use the initials “RW” for right-wing and “LW” for left-wing; that way, you can argue about these two entities as if they were single people. So there is a blizzard of accusations going on now that RW has motivated killings of LW by invoking hate speech against the LW.

I guess this rap music posted by Malkin, which seems to be quite plainly inciting hatred and violence by LW’s against the RW, just doesn’t count.

REFRAIN

We gotta get ’em, get ’em.
We gotta chill ’em, chill ’em.
We gotta get ’em, get ’em.
We gotta kill ’em, kill ’em.

…

Hate dominates like the Celts in the East
Michelle Malkin wants to snitch
Like you tell the police
She ought to be shot
They gotta be stopped

…We gotta shut down Fox News
That’s the way it has to be…

But anyway, as blogger friend Phil found out at Cassy Fiano’s blog, there is a template flying around the “LW” blogosphere helping to detail all the hate speech by the “RW” for whoever might come askin’ for it. It’s the typical LW recruitment job; if you go researching into things like date, location, and most importantly context, you find what’s being called “hate speech” is poor taste at worst — and very often, not even that.

1. Rush Limbaugh: “I tell people don’t kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus – living fossils – so we will never forget what these people stood for.”

2. Senator Phil Gramm: “We’re going to keep building the party until we’re hunting Democrats with dogs.”

3. Rep. James Hansen on Bill Clinton: “Get rid of the guy. Impreach him, censure him, assassinate him.”

4. John Derbyshire intimated in the National Review that because Chelsea Clinton had “the taint,” she should “be killed.”

5. Ann Coulter: “We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too.”

6. Ann Coulter: “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building.”

7. Bill O’Reilly: “…those clowns over at the liberal radio network, we could incarcerate them immediately. Will you have that done, please? Send over the FBI and just put them in chains.”

8. Clear Channel radio host Glenn Beck said he was “thinking about killing Michael Moore” and pondered whether “I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it,” before concluding: “No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out — is this wrong?”

My thoughts about it? I think there’s a major miscommunication going on. This antagonism left-wingers have toward the concept of an individual making decisions for himself, has caused a sort of psychosis that results in classical psychological projection. They don’t think any right-winger is capable of expressing any thought, it seems, without some sort of fax or e-mail campaign giving him the idea. And thus, when a right-winger says something irresponsible or dangerous it has to be the result of some widespread conspiracy.

My other thought — if Bill Clinton ever tires of having his name fasted on to the Monica Lewinsky legacy and wants to be known for something else, I think he could make a fair claim to the concept of “hate speech” in the United States. History will record, I’m afraid, that we suffered an enormous erosion of real civil rights through this legal concept and researchers will have to trace the genesis of the landslide to the Clinton administration’s actions in the wake of Matthew Shepherd‘s murder and the Oklahoma City bombing. Our 42nd President, quite plain & simply, did not handle these events as a public steward concerned with protecting our constitutionally protected freedom of speech and expression. And now we have all these lefties on the blogosphere babbling away about hate crimes. And that’s to preserve human life? Don’t be silly. Ask them about abortion. Ask them about executing convicted criminals who are certain to kill again if they’re allowed to live. Ask them about taking down Saddam Hussein as he was oppressing people living in his country during his bloodthirsty, corrupt regime. In all three cases they’ll come up with some kind of rule — an inviolable rule, inviolable while other rules may be violated at leisure — that says, essentially, we have to let innocent people die.

They don’t give two farts about the sanctity of human life. They want to infringe on the liberty of individuals to say things. To say things…without checking with some centralized authority first.

I think all else that needs to be said, can be summed up in the House of Eratosthenes definition of the phrase “hate speech.”

Hate Speech (n.):
Intangible noun descriptive of accidental harm done to other people by means of words. Ironically, it is also a battle cry used just before someone practices deliberate harm to other people by means of words.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

On GwatneyFriday, August 15th, 2008

On Gwatney
Friday, August 15th, 2008