How to get liberals to acknowledge that killing cops is wrong April 11 2009
When animals with mile-long rap sheets and multiple arrests kill a cop, a liberal won’t even look up from his copy of Rolling Stone, much less formulate an opinion on it. When inner cities like Oakland stage rallies in support of cop killers it’s hard to get a lefty to interrupt his sip of double mocha frappachino latte. When a liberal can be bothered to formulate a judgment on a copkiller, it’s generally as victim of oppressive society or, if they are particularly well spoken, hero qualified to speak to the enthralled masses at lefty colleges about their oppression by our society; they are worshipped as symbols of the barbarism of the death penalty. In short, cop killers generally exist because not because they are a symptom of increasing lawlessness, but because our society oppresses the less fortunate and drives them drastic action. Cop killing is a hazard of the profession.
Only when a member of the fringe element of the right kills a cop, is it “an attack on us all.”
PPG’s insufferable columnist Reg Henry’s column in todays Times Herald:
The killer of the Pittsburgh police officers did not come from nowhere. He was nurtured in a culture where anti-government feelings are imbibed like mother’s milk, where it is taken as holy writ that only guns secure our freedom, not the consent of the governed.
As far as I am concerned, people can keep their guns for self-protection or hunting as long as they are “well regulated” — to use the forgotten words of the Second Amendment. But if they want guns to make war one day against a government that a majority of Americans voted for, then I have a word for them — treasonous.
Since Obama was elected, a cottage industry of resentment has sprung up to cater to sore losers. From talk shows hosts who hope the president fails, to others who hint at insurrection, to Web sites that play on crazy fantasies (Barack Obama’s a Muslim! He was born in Kenya! He’s a Marxist!), the chorus is the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater.
These hate-mongers did not fire the fatal shots at the Pittsburgh police. But the killer — I refuse to give him the perverse pleasure of naming him — took the general illogic to its logical conclusion.
We have three needlessly dead heroes in Pittsburgh to remind us of what is at stake. United we stand — but divided we fall. I stand to defend the government. The government is us.
It’s proper that Mr. Henry is mourning the loss of the Pittsburgh cops. But with the attacks on our second amendment rights increasing in intensity (which Henry even manages to incoporporate with proper lefty outrage in his sudden appreciation of law enforcement this week), soon the only thing standing between the citizenry and total anarchy will be the police. It’s already at that point in the inner cities. Every attack on a cop is an attack on ordered and civilized society.
Too bad it’s only when someone with an alleged “right wing” background kills a cop that Henry sees it as an “attack on us all”.
Cross posted at Bluftooni
Possibly Related...
Comments, compliments or complaints?