The Insincere Call for Calmer Rhetoric

By Erik Rush

There is a subtle dynamic in play of which Americans need to be aware, and which I believe will be singularly enlightening with regard to the machinations of two of our most potent enemies: The political left and Islam. This pertains to calls for an attenuation of harsh political rhetoric in the wake of the recent shooting rampage which left Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) and four others wounded, and the actions of Muslims following a spate of what are being called terrorist attacks in the United Kingdom and Europe, though not all of these actually qualify as terrorism.

The tension was almost palpable on the part of liberal and conservative politicos and pundits in the hours prior to James Hodgkinson being named as the perpetrator of the June 14 shootings in Virginia. Had Hodgkinson turned out to be a creature of the political right, of course we would have been treated to gleeful, self-satisfied oratory from leftists affirming that private ownership of firearms should be outlawed, right wingers possess innate homicidal tendencies, and that such violence could only have been catalyzed by the political ascendency of that horrible scoundrel in the White House, Donald Trump.

Once it had been determined that Hodgkinson was in fact a rabid leftist, the cry went up for both Democrats and Republicans to tone down their rhetoric. Although this is being articulated primarily by those on the left, even some like conservative firebrand rocker Ted Nugent stated late last week that he would moderate his public message.

This made me wonder: When Democrat and liberal leaders state that we need to employ less incendiary rhetoric, to whom are they speaking? Is this “we” to whom they refer the “royal ‘we,'” or are they speaking to the ultra-liberal base of the Democrat Party? Certainly they aren’t addressing liberals and conservatives alike, because it hasn’t been conservatives and Republicans advocating for the beating, maiming, and killing of President Trump and others among their political opponents – it is only prominent liberals and Democrats who have done so, and with great relish.

In Britain, we’ve seen several terrorist attacks perpetrated by Islamists since the beginning of the year. Then, early this week, 47-year-old Briton Darren Osborne allegedly drove a truck into a crowd of Muslims leaving Ramadan prayers at a London mosque. The attack left at least one person dead and 10 injured. Days earlier in the Swedish city of Malmö, an alleged neo-Nazi drove a vehicle into a group of Iraqi refugees protesting that nation’s asylum laws.

In the latter two incidents, authorities were quick to designate these as acts of terrorism, employing such terms as “Islamophobia” and “right wing extremism.” The communities of Muslim emigrés in these nations took on the mantle of victimhood with equal alacrity, decrying the perils of their lot and the “racism” (actually anti-Muslim sentiment, since Islam is not a racial designation) of the West. They found a great deal of sympathy in the Western press, which provided them with an abundance of forums in which to air their grievances.

I believe that Republicans and conservatives taking the left’s faux chagrin at face value and validating their counterfeit idiomatic peace offerings are the height of folly. It is also quite curious that the alleged peaceful majority of Muslims residing in the West who so seldom condemn terrorist acts carried out in the name of Islam never seem to be quite as scarce when it comes to condemning such deeds as those of Darren Osborne, which could easily have been the frustrated, desperate actions of a citizen who simply got fed up with his countrymen being targeted by an insidious invading force and political leaders enabling same.

In a fistfight or in war, one does not submit to the entreaties of an opponent who executes a successful attack and then falls back to regroup. If one is able, one executes a counterattack. While I am not advocating an in-kind response to the June 14 shooting or violent acts perpetrated by Islamists, our enemies do need to be put on notice that their actions will not be tolerated in the long term.

It bears mentioning that despite the bogus regret being expressed by those on the left, high-profile liberals have not ceased their provocative rhetoric since the Virginia shooting. This speaks to the lack of restraint many liberals possess, as well as underscoring the deep hatred they have for Republicans and conservatives.

Actor and homosexual activist George Takei – who has become a really creepy old guy regardless of sexual orientation – claimed that Rep. Scalise owed his rescue to an heroic lesbian D.C. police officer. On Saturday, MSNBC host Joy Ann Reid condemned the House Majority Whip’s political positions on Obamacare, gay rights, and race, then went on to mischaracterize Scalise’s stance on those very issues.

The subversive antics of the Obama administration and its Eurozone and Islamist allies gave rise to a great deal of discussion amongst conservative pundits regarding collusion between the political left and Islamists. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” encapsulates the dynamic in play here; leftists and Islamists are indeed working in tandem to bring down Western republics and democracies, each believing that they will be able to control or subjugate the other after this is accomplished. Thus, it is no surprise that the two groups are engaging in the same passive-aggressive behavior.

The take-away from all of this? Don’t be fooled by this insincere and gutless tactic. Socialists and Islamists are not merely political opponents. They are deadly enemies to be neutralized, and with all due speed.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

  • KA

    Good, I won’t believe Ted Nugent either.