<\/a>The reaction of the Progressive left to the Tuscon shooting was calculated to obliterate the moral credibility of conservatives. The Progressives are running scared because the moral intimidation of the kind we saw over the last few days is just not working anymore. It used to be that screaming about rights, fairness, oppression, all the shibboleths calculated to shut down debate worked. Today everyone is tired of it.<\/p>\n

The larger target (is that “hate speech”?) is the Tea Party and, in the Progressive mind, its leader Sarah Palin. Progressive attacks on Sarah Palin are vicious and cruel. Progressives thought that if the moral onus of Tuscon could be shifted unto her, they get a twofer: Palin leaves and Tea Party supporters are implicated in her culpability. <\/p>\n

There’s a joke making the rounds: How do you know you have won an argument with a Progressive? When he calls you a racist, homophobe, or T-bagger. That’s the kind of talk that gets the Progressive enraged. Their days of claiming the moral high ground are over and they know it. Watch for even more vicious attacks, and watch for attempts to censor speech by other means.<\/p>\n

Below are three good analyses and Palin’s response.
\n[tab name=’John Steele Gordon – WSJ’]<\/p>\n

If You Can’t Stand the Heat . . .<\/h2>\n

Harry Truman would have had little patience for the notion that caustic political rhetoric causes murder.<\/em>
\nBy JOHN STEELE GORDON | Source: Wall Street Journal<\/a><\/p>\n

All the evidence currently available indicates that the gunman responsible for Saturday’s tragedy in Tucson, Ariz., was driven solely by internal demons. That fact hasn’t stopped commentators, overwhelmingly on the left, from suggesting that today’s “heated political rhetoric” is at least partly to blame.<\/p>\n

Pundits have frequently cited Sarah Palin’s “crosshairs map,” which uses the riflery image to mark the congressional districts of vulnerable Democrats, as inspiration for the killer. But there is a total lack of evidence that the shooter ever saw that map or that “being in the crosshairs,” which has been a common political metaphor for decades, has suddenly taken on a sinister meaning. And yet the New York Times’s Paul Krugman writes in his latest column (titled “Climate of Hate”): “It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.”<\/p>\n

Really? Has the nation’s political climate actually gotten worse in the last two years, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and the White House? Of course not.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

Read the entire article on the Wall Street Journal<\/a> website (available for seven days only).<\/em><\/p>\n

[\/tab]<\/p>\n

[tab name=’George F. Will – WAPO’]<\/p>\n

The charlatans’ response to the Tucson tragedy<\/h2>\n

By George F. Will | Washington Post<\/a><\/p>\n

It would be merciful if, when tragedies such as Tucson’s occur, there were a moratorium on sociology. But respites from half-baked explanations, often serving political opportunism, are impossible because of a timeless human craving and a characteristic of many modern minds.<\/p>\n

And still do. Hence: The Tucson shooter was (pick your verb) provoked, triggered, unhinged by today’s (pick your noun) rhetoric, vitriol, extremism, “climate of hate.”<\/p>\n

Demystification of the world opened the way for real science, including the social sciences. And for a modern characteristic. And for charlatans.<\/p>\n

A characteristic of many contemporary minds is susceptibility to the superstition that all behavior can be traced to some diagnosable frame of mind that is a product of promptings from the social environment. From which flows a political doctrine: Given clever social engineering, society and people can be perfected. This supposedly is the path to progress. It actually is the crux of progressivism. And it is why there is a reflex to blame conservatives first.<\/p>\n

Read the entire article on the Washington Post<\/a> website.<\/em>
\n[\/tab]<\/p>\n

[tab name=’Charles Krauthammer – WAPO’]<\/p>\n

Massacre, followed by libel<\/h2>\n

BY Charles Krauthammer | Washington Post<\/a><\/p>\n

\nThe charge: The Tucson massacre<\/a> is a consequence of the "climate of hate<\/a>" created by Sarah Palin<\/a>, the Tea Party, Glenn Beck<\/a>, Obamacare opponents and sundry other liberal betes noires.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

Not only is there no evidence that Loughner was impelled to violence by any of those upon whom Paul Krugman, Keith Olbermann, the New York Times, the Tucson sheriff and other rabid partisans are fixated. There is no evidence that he was responding to anything, political or otherwise, outside of his own head.<\/p>\n

A climate of hate? This man lived within his very own private climate. “His thoughts were unrelated to anything in our world,” said the teacher of Loughner’s philosophy class at Pima Community College. “He was very disconnected from reality,” said classmate Lydian Ali. “You know how it is when you talk to someone who’s mentally ill and they’re just not there?” said neighbor Jason Johnson. “It was like he was in his own world.”<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

The origins of Loughner’s delusions are clear: mental illness. What are the origins of Krugman’s?<\/p>\n

Read the entire article on the Washington Post<\/a> website.<\/em> <\/p>\n

[\/tab]<\/p>\n

[tab name=’Sarah Palin – FACEBOOK’]<\/p>\n

America’s Enduring Strength<\/h2>\n

by Sarah Palin | Facebook.com<\/a><\/p>\n