Wednesday, November 2, 2011
The Tucson Blood Libel Controversy and the Character Assassination of a Conservative
After Palin had been falsely accused in the Tucson shooting, she released a statement via a video in which she spoke about American values and liberties, and the forces of evil and good. A majority of Americans, however, were aware of only two words which she had used in describing the media and liberals immature and dangerous blame game; blood libel.
The fact that the liberal media pounced upon those words were of no surprise since they’ve done much worse; they blamed her in murder for no reason other than political hatred. The reactions of the establishment and a significant number of conservatives, though, were quite shocking; mainly that many questioned and criticized her usage of those words. Whether one agreed or disagreed with the wording she used to defend herself (which I as a Jew understood) shouldn't have made the slightest difference. It wasn’t the time to analyze her response. It was a time to passionately defend her against the appalling lies and express wholehearted support despite one’s possibly differing opinion on how she should have responded.
It is already Wednesday, three days after the story broke, and the entire media is still focused on only one thing; Herman Cain and the possibility that he sexually harassed two women in the 90’s. Actually, although I wrote “the possibility,” the media is having a field day with the Politico piece, and is determined to portray and convince the public of Cain’s guilt despite the lack of any evidence.
In no way can one compare the Tucson story and the endless attacks Palin endured, to the Politico story regarding Cain’s possible sexual harassment. It is unclear whether Cain can or will survive this, or whether it will still develop into something more serious. I also want to make it clear that I’m not on the Cain train nor convinced he’s ready to be president. However, when a hit-piece loaded with anonymous sources is released against a conservative, with the sole and obvious intention to destroy the person, it is the duty of all conservatives to defend the accused who is most likely at least partly innocent of the claims thrown at him.
Cain was attacked solely because he’s the current conservative leading the polls. Politico, or any other member of the LSM, would have never a similar story such as this if the person in question would’ve been Obama’s green jobs czar or some other liberal. Therefore, now is not the time to criticize his campaign staff despite what many see as incompetence of their part, but to create an outcry against the injustice and double standard the media has employed in the name of journalism.
Governor Palin has taught us time and again the importance of defending others. She had written Facebook posts in three different instances in order defend Juan Williams, Dan Fagan, and Dr. Laura who had come under hateful fire from the left. She rose above and disregarded the fact that all three of them have often spoken disparagingly of her, since when someone is wrongly accused, one’s own interests should be of no significance.
Those three cases were extremely significant since it involved the limitation of individual’s freedom of speech which is a basic right granted to all Americans in the first amendment. Cain’s situation is somewhat different, yet equally outrageous. He has come under false anonymous character assassination, which has become the number one tool used to destroy true bona fide conservatives. They’ve done it to Clarence Thomas, have employed it against Sarah Palin, and are now in the midst of mudslinging Rubio and Cain.
We conservatives cannot afford to remain silent in the face of these despicable actions. We must fight and protest all hateful attacks against conservatives without differentiating between those you personally support and those you personally oppose for any given campaign or job. Only if we set up a united front to counter the attacks aimed our way can we hope to cause enough uproar to put a hold to the double standard employed by the media at a regular basis.