Well, this didn’t take long. And after all the talk about “violent rhetoric” the last few days, it was inevitable, I guess.
But no less stupid.
Rep. Robert Brady, [(D-PA-01)], said he will introduce legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a Member of Congress or federal official.
"The president is a federal official," Brady said in a telephone interview with CNN. "You can't do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator or federal judge.
"This is not a wake up call, this is major alarms going off," he said.
He’s right. Major alarms are going off. Those that protect the First Amendment.
Brady is particularly incensed over a web posting by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin during the 2010 election in which she targeted 20 House Democrats, including Giffords for political defeat. The posting showed a map of the United States with the 20 Democratic congressional districts identified by gun sights.
As I mentioned earlier, the left can not claim the moral high ground on this issue, not even with this particular politician.
Brady stressed he is not "pointing at any particular party" noting that there is Democratic rhetoric and actions at times that he thinks is out of bounds. "You can disagree without being disagreeable," he said.
Uh huh. In DC, they call that “spin”. Back here in Indiana, we call it a lie. Whatever.
As for support for the bill, Brady said, "Why would you be against it?"
I guess Brady was absent during the reading of the Constitution the other day.
I am against it because I am against just about anything that threatens free speech in America. And the speech in particular that he’s so incensed about is so innocuous that this is pointless. He doesn’t want to be able to say that politicians are “targeted” during campaigns? Ok, it’s going to be really hard to talk about defeating incumbents then, if you’re going to ban anything that someone might twist into a threat.
No way, Brady. You lose. Take your piece of crap bill back to PA. And don’t come back. Congress doesn’t need people like you.
(I’m pretty sure that last statement would be illegal under his bill)
Quoting Glenn Reynolds once more:
Let me be clear, as a great man says: If you’re using this event to criticize the “rhetoric” of Sarah Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you’re either asserting a connection between the “rhetoric” and the shooting — which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie — or you’re not, in which case you’re just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. So which is it?
So, which is it, Mr. Brady?
This is the beginning, but not the end. The left is going to use this to push hard on clamping down on free speech. Watch. And be afraid. Very afraid.