Left Continues to Spin Tragedy

I have noticed that some people on the left, some I know, have had the brains or basic decency to STFU when it comes to making ANY sort of opportunistic comment on the Tuscon shooting. Others are so fucking morally bankrupt that they can't help spinning shit any which way they please to self-gratify their limp egos.

Case in Point: Gawker

"Sarah Palin Blames the Media for 'Blood Libel'

After the horrific Tucson shootings last weekend, future U.S. president Sarah Palin retreated to her prayer cave and prayed for guidance. Today, she's announced her findings: The real tragedy here is "journalists and pundits" who "manufacture a blood libel."

See, after days of a left-wing orgy of accusations that Sarah Palin was a blood-soaked murderer for all intents and purposes, the editors and readers of Gawker are now pissed at her for calling bullshit on bullshit.

It is now readily apparent to anyone with remaining brain cells, or who is not a complete ideological hack, that the tragic shooting in Tuscon was in no way related to ANYTHING happening in this reality politically, despite numerous claims to contrary from the left. Everyone from Palin, to Rush Limbaugh, to Republicans, the Tea Party to the right in general were told "YOU DID IT, YOU BASTARDS!" by the media and the left-wing moonbats, but then I repeat myself.


It is also BLINDINGLY obvious that despite the lack of facts early on, and then in spite of them later, the left attempted to exploit the tragedy in Tuscon for political gain, trying to stoke incendiary anger against the right while decrying all things incendiary. Oh, wait, did I say "attempted", as in past tense? It still continues with fucktards like Bill Maher and the cretins at Gawker.

Of course, this is, in a sense, brilliant. Having being caught out, AGAIN, as dishonest fanatics, the Left will try to Ju Jistsu the discussion back to Palin, the topic of discussion being, as always, "Sarah Palin is an asshole because we were losers in high school, and still are. So there!"

Apparently, Gawker feels it is unfair and insensitive for Palin to use the term "blood libel" when describing the vicious smear campaign the Left engaged in over the shooting in Arizona.

STOP.

First, we would not really need to go further, would we?

Pot. Kettle. Unfair Asshole.

Basically, Gawker is saying:

"How DARE you use overheated rhetoric and make ridiculous accusations that point out our overheated rhetoric and ridiculous accusations!!"

Short note to Gawker.

Fuck you.

Longer note....

Is "blood libel" really an unfair use of the term? Let's see how Gawker explains their umbrage:

"Maureen O'Connor pointed out that "blood libel" actually "refers to a false accusation or claim that religious minorities, almost always Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays." Is Sarah Palin accusing the liberal media of murdering Jew babies? Where does the ADL stand on this? "

The whole accusing the media of murdering Jewish babies line is not just meant as a witty crack. It's meant to distract from the fact that the metaphor immediately previous is actually pretty accurate when read.

The Left is continually trying to pin the actions of lunatics who go on murderous rampages on the right, either by claiming they were of the right (when they are most typically, NOT) or that the right influenced their decision to kill. As has been pointed out numerous times over the last few days by others, it was done in the case of JFK, RFK, Oklamahoma City, and even 9/11. It happens when the maniac is even demonstrably of the left mindset.

So the left is repeatedly making collective false accusations of murder against sections of a population, claiming they do so to further their ideology, libeling them.

So, HOW does this analogy not work again?

Of course it does. It's accurately pretty on target (heh) as analogy or metaphor, but it cuts way too close to the truth; it demolishes yet again one of the Left's precious narratives that make them feel superior despite their bitter mediocrity.

So Gawker and its cretinous cohorts act like it is some sort of bizarre comparison, claiming Palin was saying something she was not, making cracks about "prayer caves", because, you know, anyone who prays is a primitive.

It would be entirely infuriating if it were not for the fact that their smug delusional asses are getting whacked in public opinion. Our job is to make sure to kick them while they are down, and if you have a trouble with that violent rhetoric, kiss my fucking ass!

UPDATE:

Hey, looks like a whole lot of people agree with me, right and left!