It is still too early to know exactly what the motivations of the shooter who killed six people and injured 13 more, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, at a Tucson, AZ shopping center this morning. We have some YouTube clips, hints of a criminal history, and stories of possible mental instability, but there is nothing yet to nail down his motives.
What we do know is this: people are already starting to place the blame. It’s the fault of politicians, talking heads, and pundits. This is not quite true. The tragic shooting this morning in Arizona was the fault of no one but the man who is the alleged gunman. There is, however, blame to be placed at the feet of politicians, talking heads, and pundits. They did not buy the gun, go to that Safeway, or pull the trigger, but their rhetoric has created an environment so hostile to political opposition that it could push people to commit acts of violence.
Sharron Angle should not be blamed for this shooting because of her talk of “second amendment solutions” during the mid-term elections. Sarah Palin isn’t to blame because she put, among others, Rep. Giffords in her “cross hairs” for her vote for the health care plan. Jesse Kelly isn’t to blame for his campaign event inviting supporters to “get on target” to remove Giffords from office in June in which people were invited to go shoot an M-16 with the candidate. Angle, Palin, and Kelly are guilty of one thing and one thing only—contributing to an atmosphere of hatred, vitriol, and scorn which is starting to border on eerily unstable.
I realize that vitriol in political rhetoric is a fact of life. It waxes and wanes. But I have never seen it tilt so far toward psychosis. We have taken the black-or-white, with-us-or-against-us rhetoric of the last administration and begun applying it to domestic policy in a way that I find completely insulting and unnecessary. If you don’t agree with such and such position, you don’t simply hold a different opinion—you are dangerous, maybe treasonous. You may suddenly find yourself in someone’s “cross hairs.” We are suddenly, inexplicably, unreasonably at war with each other, at war with ourselves. The other side of a political issue is no longer the opposition, but the enemy.
Wake up, people!! We’re at war with al Qaeda. We’re kind of at war with North Korea, Pakistan, and maybe even Iran. Osama bin Laden is the enemy. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad is the enemy. Gabrielle Giffords is not the enemy. Barack Obama is not the enemy. Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle and Jesse Kelly aren’t the enemy. Health care, illegal immigration, and economic recovery are not battlefields, merely political hot potatoes. It is possible, even highly likely, for sensible people to disagree on these issues, but still like each other when a debate on the issues is over. By all accounts, Rep. Giffords is proof that this can be possible, as her colleagues on both sides of the aisle have attested all day.
Tonight, in an extraordinarily candid exchange with reporters during a news conference, the sheriff of Pima Co. said, “That may be free speech, but it is not without consequences.” Words have power. Oratory can get people moving. But in what direction? For what purpose? In the service of what cause? Talk of “second amendment solutions” has no place in American political discourse. The Taliban is in need of a “second amendment solution;” American politicians are not. Is it not possible for people to recognize that public servants care deeply about America? Otherwise, there is very little reason for them to open themselves up to this foolishness. Gabrielle Giffords is a patriot. So is Sarah Palin. While people may disagree and disagree strongly with the positions of one or both of these women, war should not be declared on either of them. Neither should be placed in “cross hairs,” political or actual.
“The streets of heaven are too crowded with angels tonight.” Those words, from an episode of the West Wing, ring true this night. What are we to learn from this tragic Saturday? We can disagree with each other politically and do so vociferously without lowering ourselves to our baser inclinations. We are not, or at least we should not be, at war with each other. Politics should not be a blood sport. We should have disputes, debates, and deep conversations, but save the warfare for mutual enemies—mostly foreign, though some domestic, who threaten the peace and tranquility of these United States.
We must recognize the consequences of our words. Oliver Wendell Holmes famously said that the right to free speech does not give one the right to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Those who use the rhetoric of warfare in the relatively mundane world of domestic politics are dangerously close to yelling “Fire!” The stampede that could ensue, if the events of today are not an isolated incident, could be devastating for the United States. Words. Have. Power. Power to heal. Power to hurt. Power to create mayhem. It is our responsibility—yours, mine, Sarah Palin’s, Barack Obama’s—our responsibility to change the tone of political discourse in this country.
“The streets of heaven are too crowded with angels tonight.” My thoughts and prayers are with the families of those who were killed, those who were hurt, and everyone who was affected by today’s events. God bless you all.
No comments:
Post a Comment