And Dove Bars shall issue from the assholes of the righteous

*

Predictably, it begins: the call for "civility" by a Beltway pundit, "Howard Fineman," who hopes all of us will emulate George W. Bush "at his ardent best" on a 9/11 rubble heap, as he lathered up the nation for the willy-nilly destruction of Afghan places and people completely uninvolved with the Bin Laden cabal. Or Hillary Clinton's peckerwood husband as he drooled platitudes about "God and the Bible" and "tolerance, forbearance, and love" a few days after a right-wing conspiracy executed the largest act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history.

This "Howard Fineman" creature is the worst that corporate media has to offer. He asserts, with only the same information at hand that you and I have right now, that the Giffords massacre was "not about politics, ideology or party." And that, therefore, an appeal to "civility" is the salve to be applied. While posing as a voice of reason and moderation, this "Howard Fineman" instructs the nation to avoid discussing the level of accountability that might be assignable to the right-wing media and political ringleaders. These animals who have clawed their way to wealth and power by trading on unvarnished prejudice and violent political rhetoric over the past several decades must not be connected with the predictable fallout of their actions. We must avoid analysis, one supposes, because this might create discomfort for "Howard Fineman" and his paymasters, and the horrible, horrible people he shares cocktails and finger foods with to gain personal validation.

Never fear. I am certain that President North Star will lap up every refined droplet of "Howard Fineman's" wise counsel. And that as a result of same we Americans can look forward to a new Era of Good Feelings that will usher in a hundred years of prosperity and peace. Long Live "Howard Fineman"!

Then and now

*

As I revisited Zappa's "Mom and Dad" earlier this evening I was slightly taken aback by the condemnation of police as the Establishment's agents of political violence. I believe that was true: impulsive police disrespect for and harassment of "longhairs" was known by most of "us" in the late 1960s and early 1970s, if not from first-hand experience, then from the accounts of our friends and acquaintances, and certainly from continual news reports. Each individual circumstance differed, of course, and two reasonable people could have reached opposite conclusions about many of them. Also, cops also certainly created uncomfortable circumstances for "hippies" caught in the process of committing a crime, and I doubt that rednecks got any gentler treatment when apprehended committing the same acts. Nevertheless, after sifting through those ambiguities, it was clear then and now that the police, and even the state National Guards, were agents of suppressing lawful political assembly and expression.

This evening, in a TPM report about a possible accomplice in the Giffords massacre, here's part of what Pima County (Arizona) Sheriff Clarence Dupnik had to say to reporters at a news conference:

The sheriff spent several minutes directing his anger at the "vitriol" he said comes from radio and television personalities. "That may be free speech, but its not without consequences," Dupnik said.

"I hope that are all Americans are as saddened and as shocked as we are," he said.

"We need to do a little soul searching."

Arizona in particular, he said, has "become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

I think it's fair to say that law-enforcement officers tend to be socially conservative in any location. So it's heartening to me that one from an especially "conservative" corner of the nation would directly acknowledge misgivings to a national audience that certain social worldviews in his jurisdiction have gotten way out of hand.

I believe that the typical sworn law-enforcement officer, like the typical soldier, is indoctrinated with a clear concept of duty and professional mission that trumps individual beliefs. I know we can point to racially motivated police brutality, for example, as one of many indicators that cops are no more perfect than any other sector of society. But my point is that at this point in time, police are not largely in the business of suppressing liberal political expression. That task was "privatized" somewhere along the way.

Giffords on NPR

*

As I suspected, the Arizona congresswoman targeted in today's assassination attempt is the same one I heard on All Things Considered while driving home from work on 5 January 2011 (had forgotten her name). I remember quickly becoming exasperated with her opening statement, smelling of namby-pamby "centrism," regarding what she intended to do during the 112th Congress:

First and foremost, work with the Republicans. I come from the state of Arizona, which is a pretty bipartisan state. I formerly served in the minority, know what it's like to work with my Republicans in the majority and in the minority. And that's truly what American people want. I do think it's important, though, to look back on the reflection. 

But her tone and her words soon became much more nuanced as she pushed back against the Republican midterm "mandate" nonsense. She easily handled the remarks of know-nothing Illinois Republican Pete Roskam while clearly and succinctly taking down the main Republican talking points against HCR. By the end of the piece I came around to thinking that she might be a good egg after all.

"Barring info...speculation benefits no one"

*

That is NPR's rejoinder about the Giffords shooter and his motives. They're concerned about "speculation."

Little "speculation" is necessary when facts are available.

Rep. Giffords's Republican opponent Jesse Kelly had campaign rally shoot-in to "help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office."

The federal judge shot dead in today's incident, John Roll, had previously received right-wing death threats by telephone that required intervention by the U.S. Marshals Service.

One account, a second-hand attribution to the Democratic National Committee Western States Director, posted by Atrios, has the perpetrator calling out the name of each victim he shoots.

Anybody following national news for the past several years knows that Arizona has a highly expressive right-wing gun culture that has normalized the concept of bringing firearms to political events. (Sorry, don't have time to find a link right now.)

So, NPR, why don't you take "political junkie Ken Rudin" off the pontification beat this evening and assign him try some real reporting on the alleged shooter's internet ramblings? Based on an initial look at samples posted to TPM, the shooter would seem to have been motivated to a large extent by psychosis. But in the few of his utterances I've glanced at so far there appears to be a stack of kindling cut fresh from the right-wing noise bush. As one would expect, those political assassination attempts that are not the work of paid hit men are typically the finale of a grand vision obsessing an individual who has lost his mind. We don't have to go too far out on the "speculation" limb to write a reasonable first draft of what went wrong in Arizona today.

Hideous

*

And not only hideous, but very much foreseen and publicized by DHS over a year ago.

Do you remember what happened when DHS released that memo about the rising threat of right-wing extremism? And do you remember the howling about this from right-wingers at the time, like the samples captured at the bottom of the HuffPost article linked above?

And do you remember how DHS chief Napolitano fumbled against that right-wing pushback? And, finally, do you remember how, when questioned by TPM this past September about actual examples of right-wing domestic extremism over the year since the original DHS memo had been issued, she referred to it as "ancient history"? I do.

Right-wing celebrity pundits using mainstream communications media fire up haters with eliminationist rhetoric covered by a veneer of sick humor. Right-wing politicians refuse to disavow pigs like Limbaugh or Beck, and will even express sympathy for the seething fans who are infected with this violent, schizoid ideation. How many times have you hears a senior Republican establishment figure say something to the effect of "Well, I may not agree with the rhetoric, but I certainly understand why these people are so angry."

But "centrist" shape-shifters like Napolitano and President North Star, who always approach this topic without candor in order to spare themselves a scolding from John McCain and Rush Limbaugh and Erick Erickson, share in the accountability for this abominable political massacre. I'm sure that all we'll hear about this from Responsible Democrats in the coming days are abstract platitudes about the horror of it all in This Great Nation founded on principles of blah blah blah; and boilerplate expressions of how everyone's thoughts should "be with the families" of the victims. But not a goddam meaningful word about the hate mongers or their mesmerized audience.

Editor's note: yes, I am aware that we don't have many confirmed facts yet about the alleged shooter or his motives. I see no point in being "even-handed" at this point, but I will immediately apologize for jumping the gun when it is proven that the shooter is a smelly, card-carrying ACLU socialist vegan.