Noticing a theme?
Re: “Anti-government politics fostering climate of violence,” editorial, April 19, 2010.
“Politicians and activists who sow disdain for government indirectly encourage the mistrust that breeds violence. Unless the American political debate matures, there will be blood spilled.”
Apparently, legitimate dissent died along with the Bush presidency. For eight years, anti-Bush activists openly questioned the legitimacy of the administration (“Bush stole the election”), accused the government of conspiracy (“9/11 was an inside job”), and displayed placards that called for the assassination of the president. But only now, according to the S-P editorial, does “disdain for government” breed violence.
Far from being a fringe movement associated with “Birther” wackos and anti-government militia, the grassroots Tea Party evolved in response to the unprecedented expansion of the federal government, which began under Bush and enthusiastically endorsed by President Obama. Since the financial meltdown two years ago, government spending is out of control, the federal deficit has topped $1 trillion US, California is bankrupt, the country is about to lose its AAA credit rating, and the Federal Reserve has been printing money faster than you can say “Yes, we can.” This development could very well have a negative impact on the future of all Americans – including those people, as the editorial describes them, in “steerage” – and the Tea Party participants are within their rights to protest it.
Pace the S-P editorial, Tea Partiers are not anti-government; rather, they are for limited government, which is quite different. They feel that the state has over-stepped its mandate and wish to preserve their constitutionally guaranteed freedoms while they can. Moreover, they are taking action where it counts – at the polls in November.
I suggest that the S-P start actually covering the Tea Party rallies rather than the left-wing reaction to them. The only people who see these protests as a call for violence are those politicians who seek to exploit fear to their advantage, much like Bill Clinton did following the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. It would be nice if the fear-mongers in our local newspaper of record would recognize this instead of publishing one of the most disingenuous and irresponsible editorials that I have ever seen.
I forgot “disgusting”.
The SP should be called to account for the lack of “spilled blood” during the run-up to the November 2010 elections.
Unless, of course, they can reasonably show how the “political debate matured.”