Did Violent Right Wing Rhetoric Motivate Loughner? Does it Matter If it Didn't?

The hollow, empty argument we are hearing now from the right, including Sarah Palin and many in the news media who want to duck responsibility for the toxic political atmosphere that surrounded the Arizona shooting, is that "there is no evidence that violent rhetoric and imagery had anything to do with Loughner's shooting spree."

The problem with that argument is that if there was nothing wrong with Palin's cross hairs targeting Democrats, or death threats to Bart Stupak, or swastikas displayed at healthcare reform town halls,or schmucks with guns strapped to their hips at anti-healthcare reform rallies ( no doubt carried by those who whose insurance wont cover a penile enlargement), if there were no consequences to Democratic congressional offices being shot at, no one would be talking about any of it now in the wake of the Arizona shootings.

The simple fact that everyone is in fact talking about it, and that the right is spending so much time defending it, shows there is a collective guilty conscience that is rampant on the right for its imagery and violent behavior, guilt in the news media and outlets like CNN who carried images of the most freakish right wing behavior during the town hall meetings like it represented a legitimate point of view and was "just politics" which had the effect of legitimizing it, and Obama himself who shirked from saying anything about any of it, including the shooting of congressional Democrats offices over healthcare and simply hid from the problem. Democrats are also to blame for not being forceful enough in denouncing those actions, and holding those responsible for the reckless and irresponsible way these incidents were instigated, handled and portrayed.

Even Giffords herself, who previously had publicly said she was "uncomfortable" with Sara Palins cross hairs imagery on her as a "target" didn't seem to take it on with the outrage it deserved or with the same vitriol that was aimed at her.Not that it was her responsibility to act like they do, but too often the media dismisses these threats as "just politics:" and gives the most attention to those who make the most noise.

It really doesn't matter whether Loughner was motivated by any of this or not. If it wasn't a real issue, if there was not a sense of collective guilt, no one would be talking about it.

The Arizona shooting has spurred the debate about language because people have known for long time that the violent right wing rhetoric and behavior has been wrong from the beginning and no one, especially in the media did anything about it. Does anyone really believe that if those acts and rhetoric were met with universal condemnation and derision, they would continue? And the same for the fact that many right wingers in congress were doing their best to stir up red faced hatred against healthcare reform making it an issue of anti-Americanism, trashing the constitution, and comparing those who supported healthcare reform to Nazi Germany and national socialism.And the news media let them get away with it without comment.

Obama of course hid during all of this," not wanting to meddle" no doubt and instead gave the crazies every indication that their lunacy was working and it did, since he eventually cut a back room deal to kill the public option which was the biggest target of those opposed to healthcare reform. And it was healthcare reform, courtesy of Republicans and the lunatic right that was the object of the most hatred,and calls to violence ( which is what came out of the mouths of Sharon Angle, Michelle Bachman and the web site of Sarah Palin).

It doesn't really matter if Loughner was motivated by any of it. At the very least a politically violent atmosphere was created by Republicans and the right that certainly motivated those who shot at the congressional offices of Democrats who voted for Obama's (pathetic) bill. And no one can say that Loughner wasn't a virus growing in a Petrie dish of toxic politics and hate that multiplied whether a direct connection can be drawn to Loughner's shootings or not. So even if Loughner was not directly motivated to do what he did by Palin, or Bachman, or Angle, or Bohener or Tea Party activists who toted guns to town hall meetings, if the behavior and lunacy of those on the right wasn't a real problem before Loughner no one would be talking about it now.

Look at this way -- suppose you got a call one day that your 10 year old daughter had been in a bad accident and was in intensive care. You drop what you're doing and race to the hospital. And on the way you experience a flood of remorse and regret for every time she asked you to see her in a school play, or a dance recital, or to help her pick out a Halloween costume and you didn't do it because you were too busy with your work, or a football game or going shopping or something else. You get to the hospital and find out it was just a case of mistaken identity,it was another little girl who was in the accident and your daughter is fine and at home. So what do you? Dismiss all the thoughts you had about how you could have done things better, things you regretted having done because you knew it was wrong, and just forget about it and go back to your old ways? Or do you take it as a wake up call and change the way you do things? That's what this is all about, not Loughner.