Let me ask a question. These people on the right you're referring to, are they doing so directly or in the context of the claim of Ms. Palin's or the Tea Parties' culpability in this matter. To the extent its the former, please see my comment above. To the extent it's the latter, I just haven't encountered too many conservatives making this claim.I don't really know how many of 'em are "in response," vs how many were posted subsequently because the "favorite book" list came out subsequently, but I'm not so sure how much that even matters. Whether or not these folks on the right are making ridiculous suggestions about the guy being a leftist in response to ridiculous suggestions from folks on the left claiming he was a rightist, or the tea party made him do it, or... well, whatever else they're claiming, they're still making ridiculous suggestions, that don't hold up under scrutiny.
Your overall point, though, is accurate. This guy did it because he was plain-out batsh*t crazy. That oughtn't be a matter of political debate. Batsh*t crazy is independent of politics and batsh*t crazy isn't going to be appeased by a more pleasant tone of politics.
I mean, if they were saying "If you can blame the tea party rhetoric (or the Ayn Rand book on the list, or the gold standard bullshit in his rants), why can't we blame "The Communist Manifesto, and thus call him a leftist" I'd be with you. But I don't agree that it is acceptable or in any way logical to answer one kind of foolishness (he's a product of the Tea Party/rightwing rhetoric) with different foolishness (He's obviously a leftist.)
Neither the left or the right (neither individual people, or the political philosophies of either camp) are responsible for what this guy did.
Anyone trying to sell the notion that the party they ain't a member of or the political philosophy they don't subscribe to is to blame, is exploiting the tragedy for partisan gain, and should be ashamed of themselves.
Posted 01/10/2011 02:31 PM