Monday Morning, January 17, 2011
Last week, I fully intended to write about “The King’s Speech,” a wonderfully entertaining film based on real historical events that is all about friendship and royalty and language and the power of speech. (Already, in this season of awards, it is on the top of most lists.) And then on the way home from the theater, the news reported the shooting in Tucson. Details were sketchy – a congresswoman, young, smart, a Democrat who did not fit the mold, married to an astronaut, gunned down execution style, a shot to the back of the head, along with a collection of other good people, young and old. A federal judge, too. Many dead. The perpetrator: a crazed madman.
I thought, “This is going to be big.”
Like you, I was angry. I knew enough to picture the scene; an innocent gathering of politically concerned folks speaking openly to an accessible congresswoman about issues when unprovoked, multiple staccato gunshots rang out. LeaderFOCUS became my means of expression.
So again, I knew it would be big. But now a week later, I did not imagine how big. Gabrielle Giffords’ battle for survival dominated the news for the full week. When I suggested a link between vitriol and violence, apparently, I was not alone. The question triggered controversy at every corner. I didn’t consider myself a prophet then or now, but the mere question certainly stirred up the pot. My little LeaderFOCUS got way more hits than usual – by nearly three to one.
And in the talk, the suggestion has been made that finding a link between extreme rhetoric and violence is tantamount to an accusation of cause; as in, those who spew vitriol are responsible for the violence. That one didn’t even occur to me until I saw a couple of headlines (Wall Street Journal and Washington Post) implying that liberals had blamed conservatives not for the rhetoric that creates a climate of violence, but for the tragedy itself. That’s a stretch. Some complained about Sarah Palin’s media campaign “targeting” liberals, putting them in the “crosshairs.” That the mere complaint is an assessment of blame for the shooting is missing the mark entirely. Sarah Palin didn’t pull the trigger, Jared Loughner did. Then, there was Palin’s voluntary seven-minute YouTube speech, which was conciliatory enough, until she lamented over the opposition invoking a “blood libel,” a sentence that could just have easily been omitted.
In retrospect, in the aftermath of a tragedy that touched the nation, getting to know the stories of the victims and the mind-bending cruelty of the shooter, I do wonder if I took the high road last week. True, for some time I have been looking for an opening to vent over my annoyance with much of conservative talk. At the time this seemed a fitting opportunity. Maybe even courageous. But I realize now, perhaps, that I could have deleted a few sentences of my own. Righteous indignation can sometimes be confused with empty rant.
So today, a week later, I would prefer to take that high road. There was something noble, something truly American about the response of the people of Tucson to this tragedy. The innocent smile of the nine-year old Christina Taylor Green, the recitation of the First Amendment on the floor of the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Giffords, an elderly husband shielding his wife, taking the bullets and saving her life at the expense of his own, a surgical team skillfully tending to terrible wounds; all of this and more unleashed a national civility that for the moment, melted partisan barriers, prompted a healthy national pause, toned down the heated rhetoric and reminded us of something that too often gets lost in the never-ending national debate. This young man’s assault on the Congresswoman and her friends was an assault the things we value most as a nation. And as a people, we rose to the occasion.
The perennial debates over policy and allocation of resources will certainly pick up speed again. All too soon. As we return to the business at hand, may we remember the high road.
And may we remember young Christina’s smile.
Copyright Kenneth E Kemp 2011
Hi, Ken. I did not respond last week because I was speechless. Today, as we remember the death of Martin Luther King, I realize that our country, like many other countries, has a sad, even sinister, side to our history…one of violence perpetrated against those who speak for justice. Certainly we could blame politics, each other, the president, Sara Palin, the Pope,etc. But satan is at work here, trying to divide us and win us to his side. Jesus spoke of a nation divided against itself. CS Lewis sent Screwtape to show us how it’s done. We are one nation, under God. Let’s remember that and pray for the disturbed individuals that will always exist to divide us. Blessings to all….
Wow, Ken! What a commentary you have given us the past 2 weeks. On the subject of political vitriol: I have, perhaps, an interesting perspective as one who “missed” nearly 6 years of American political dialog while residing in Europe. When I first returned, I was shocked by the “disunity” and “polarization” between political camps in this country. I couldn’t believe what had happened to my country during my absence.
After further reflection, I think much of my reaction was because there didn’t seem to be much philosophical disagreement among the Europeans with whom I regularly interacted. Socialism, pacifism, political correctness and big government seem almost universally valued, even among so-called “conservatives.” Heaven forbid that I should ever mention having voted for Bush! Then again, it was amazing how my popularity as an American increased when Obama was elected (I managed to keep my vote for McCain private).
All this to say, I’m afraid that the Europeans have all but given up genuine political discourse. There is no Beck or Rush or Palin or Fox News to push back against the mainstream media. Imagine a world where Olberman seems to be the average news commentator! Now that I’m nearly over my reverse culture shock, I’m happy to say that I welcome the debate! It also would be much too short-sighted to let a violent, nut-case become the reason we can no longer tolerate the freedom to articulate our beliefs.
That’s where your “high road” idea really resonates with me. Disagreement without vitriol is the goal. However, when our aversion to vitriol becomes greater than our respect for freedom of thought and expression, God help us!
I hear Christ’s words “take my yokeupon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble in heart” (Matt. 11:29).
Then check out luke 627-36 ( too long to quote ) which concluded with these words from King Jesus about how we are to be sons of the Most High by loving our enemies “because he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked (lit. evil). Be merciful just as your Father is merciful.”
Even if politicos and pundits ignore these words I aspire to be known as “a son of the Most High” so I pray to be a kind person and merciful. May the Godhead help me!
Ken, I had missed VITRIOL AND VIOLENCE last week so I went back and read it. I have abandoned all talk radio because of its vitriol, its unrelenting divisiveness, its condemnation without significant and helpful dialogue. That is on both the liberal and the conservative side. I could not agree with THE HIGH ROAD MORE. In our climate, it’s quite true: “Righteous indignation can sometimes be confused with empty rant.” Your portrait of America’s response was the impression I believe that will most help us deal with a horrible epidemic of violence and division that plagues our country.