More on Cantor: Stop Using Threats for Political Gain, as It Encourages Violence; Democratic Spokesman Apparently Disagrees

Drew had this below, but there's an update.

"Dangerously fanning the flames" of violence.

From his presser:

I do not condone violence. There are no leaders in this building, nor rank and file members in this building, that condone violence. Period. I’ve received threats since I assumed elected office, not only because of my position, but also because I’m Jewish. I’ve never blamed anyone in this body for that. Period…

Just recently I have been directly threatened. A bullet was shot through the window of my campaign office in Richmond this week. And I received threatening emails. But I will not release them, because I believe such actions will only encourage more to be sent.

Legigimate threats should be treated as security issues and they should be dealt with by the appropriate law enforcement officials. It is reckless to use these incidents as media vehicles for political gain.

That is why I have deep concerns that some — DCCC chairman Chris Van Hollen, and DNC chairman Tim Kaine in particular — are dangerously fanning the flames by suggesting that these incidents be used as a political weapon. Security threats against members of Congress is not a partisan issue and they should never be treated that way. To use such threats as political weapons is reprehensible.

A DNC spokesman has decided to fan the flames further and basically say that it's okay to shoot at Republicans because they're talkin' shit about the Democrats' quarterback-hero boyfriend:

Update: DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse hits back:

We disagree with the charge made by Rep. Cantor today that Democrats are using acts of violence for political gain. Let’s be clear: calling on Republican leaders who have contributed in part to this anger by wildly mischaracterizing the substance and motives of health reform to condemn these acts is entirely appropriate.

Instead of distracting from the issue with more attacks, we would again ask Mr. Cantor and other Republicans, as we did yesterday, to join Chairman Kaine in working to ratchet down the rhetoric, condemn deplorable behavior and find ways to disagree on these issues without the charged rhetoric that we’ve been hearing from Republican leaders.

He doesn't say a goddamn word about someone shooting into Cantor's office. Doesn't denounce it.

You be the judge. If political violence is to be denounced, but he himself won't denounce a gun being fired into a Republican's office, then what is the message here? Seems to be endorsing it as legitimate.

Below, Clyburn says that people "get their signals" on violence from their political leaders.

So by refusing to denounce someone firing a gun into Cantor's office-- what "signal" are leftists' political leaders sending out?

Remember This?

I don't remember a lot of media clucking over that.

Thanks for the reminder to StarChamberMaid.

Quote: From LauraW:

They are outrageously outraged that a Republican might try to snatch the precious mantle of Victim.

It's really important to them.

She wrote that in the context of the Koz Kidz claiming (of couse) that Cantor shot a bullet into his own office to gin up sympathy. You know, just like those wily Jews did on Kristallnact.

posted by Ace at 01:31 PM

| Access Comments