Sunday, January 8, 2012

There's No Demagoguery Quite Like Fantasy-/Fear-based Demagoguery...

...and David Climenhaga specializes in both

Sometimes the best way to to tell what really stings a far-left ideologue is what they pretend to dismiss.

And the reason it stings is because it's so true. And they know it.

That seemed to be the case recently when cartoon character David Climenhaga made a wry reference to a Bad Company blogpost pointing out his fearmongering demagoguery related to the long gun registry.

I'm sure readers remember, but just in case you don't, a reminder: Climenhaga dropped a suggestion that abolishing the handgun registry is next on the Harper government's agenda. His evidence? Well, he has no evidence.

For good reason. It's hard to have evidence that something is on the agenda when it's unequivocally not on the agenda.

In reality, Climenhaga knows what he's doing. The left has exploited guns as their favourite wedge issue for decades in Canada, and he's doing what he can to try to keep that wedge issue alive. He does it badly, but he does his best. Which is sad when you think about it.

Today, on the one-year anniversary of the shooting of US Democratic congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, Climenhaga is back at it again. And like any other cartoon character, he's predictable. He's once again peddling the far-left myth that the lunatic who took aim at Giffords was set off by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

It's fiction. Anyone who isn't viewing the tragedy through the lens of a desperate need to blame it on their political adversaries knows that. Climenhaga himself might even know it... but don't hold your breath.

"Mr Loughner was known to hold extreme negative views on such topics as the right of women to have an abortion or to hold public office, as well believing that the US government was practicing mind control, faking spaceflights, and had backed the 911 attacks," Climenhaga writes. "But such beliefs, while they are associated with the Tea Party right, are of necessity completely legal in a democracy."

In terms of beliefs popular with the Tea Party, one of these things is not like the others. Oddly enough, it's the one idea that does find traction amongst the Tea Party: opposition to abortion. The other things are entirely inventions necessary to advance Climenhaga's fantasy-based demagoguery.

That becomes crystal clear when you consider that Climenhaga attempts to attribute 9/11 trutherism to the Tea Party. That's a belief far more at home among the Occupy movement. Don't worry, I'm getting to the occupiers.

Climenhaga's attempt to paint Loughner as an ideological compatriot of Palin and the Tea Party by linking only a single belief prevalent amongst the Tea Party, and known to be held by Palin, is extremely thin gruel. It's actually slightly more substantive than his past offerings, but that's actually saying next to nothing.

Climenhaga also overlooks reports by those who knew Loughner -- and went to high school with him -- that Loughner, in his younger days, was actually a far-leftist whose beliefs gravitated much closer to the Occupy movement than anything even resembling the Tea Party.

Which brings me to the Occupy movement, and just how self-serving the far-left is in politicizing these sorts of violent acts.

Some may remember what happened in November when Oscar Ortega-Hernandez opened fire on the White House. It was a very big story for a few weeks. Some may even remember that Ortega-Hernandez had been spotting hanging out at the Occupy DC encampment. They later honoured him with a moment of silence.

These are the same people who pushed an elderly woman down a flight of stairs, so don't be shocked.

Predictably, Climenhaga isn't doing handstands trying to associate Ortega-Hernandez with the Occupy movement. I don't think the reasons why need to be explained.

Although the pro-Occupy shills of the far-left did handstands trying to dispute the connection. Like Climenhaga, they did it badly, but they did their best. Which, again, is just sad.

But this is all just background. What Climenhaga really wants to do is plant the idea of of imminent political gun violence in Canada -- although we've already seen that Climenhaga will settle for the act of a demented, confused gunman that he himself can politicize.

Once again, Climenhaga offers no evidence. He alludes to the allegedly-threatening tone of pro-gun advocates on Twitter. Which is funny when you think about it.

But, in the end, it just comes back to the common political currency of Climenhaga: demagoguery.

Seeing as how Climenhaga doesn't seem to understand demagoguery. So it seems useful to conclude with a definition: "A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace".

Fits the bill nicely, even if David Climenhaga himself can't bring himself to admit it... to himself.

No comments:

Post a Comment