On the heels of another mass shooting...
On the heels of another mass shooting, this time a firebombing and shooting of a LDS church, the right has shifted its dialogue once again. This time it is a claim to persecution; it occurred at a church, therefore Christianity must be under attack. And this time the spin includes the old reliable excuses: (1) A military vet (2) with mental problems.
Forget the fact that the shooter's house on Google maps has a TRUMP for President sign on display. Ignore that the idiot drove a small penis truck which still wasn't enough of a statement. No, he had to assure the world he was a true patriot with two large American flags mounted to fly from the bed of his 'Murican-made truck. Dismiss the fact that he had signed public petitions against abortion and against mask mandates. Yup, a proud display of the hypocrisy between "pro-life" and pro-death agendas, and that he failed to see the dissonance of the opposing viewpoints. In other words, it appears he was core MAGA through and through.
But it doesn't stop there. The claim of persecution is oh so rich. As a former Christian brought up in an evangelical household from age seven, and having served several years penance in a Christian right wing school created in opposition to segregation, I find it HI-Larious to hear what I know is an outright lie.
You see, the evangelicals have never viewed LDS as Christians, rather, a CULT. (Careful not to mix up A CULT with The OCCULT which we liberals supposedly partake of.) It doesn't matter that Mormons call themselves Christians and generally act more New Testament Jesus in their charity, community, and lower divorce rates than the religious right evangelicals. Nope, the same folks who won't put up with you saying he/him, she/her, they/them don't give a shit how you self identify. If you are a Democrat and say you are a Christian then to quote Highlander, "There can be only one." Demon-crat or Christian. Either / Or.
So when LDS members call themselves Christians, the RWNJs scoff, hold their nose but not their tongue, and either whisper or shout Cult as needed in the moment. And in this moment, like with Republican-ticket LDS member Mitt Romney for President 2012, they set aside their convictions for preferences and use what suits them. Thus, a claim of Christian persecution sprung forth. UPDATE: And now it appears that the shooter was himself a Christian resulting in Christian on Christian violence, or more aptly, Christian on Christian persecution. It was the Trump administration which set the narrative by claiming Christian persecution from the onset.
This event coming in the wake of the Kirk killing seems a little more inner circle, internal conflict that what one might hear, or more aptly not hear, in the current spin cycle. Kirk was killed in Utah, Mormon country, by a member of the LDS church. The following week of accusations and recriminations laid bare several inconsistencies and fodder for conspiracies. After the trans community was blamed without merit, the shift moved to the Groyper community based on the bullet casings engraved with internet slang. The internal sparring of far right hate speech, the Nick Fuentes crowd versus the Charlie Kirk approach, became a news talking point. And then the news cycle shifted to the analysis of the Mormon reared shooter and his community.
When this attack at the LDS church happened and the shooter's truck was shown, my first thought, other than the obvious it's-another-white-man-with-a-gun, was JFC! It's a Trumpist! Who else feels so insecure in his manhood to drive that size truck and so confrontational to permanently mount dual American flags, embracing the Patriotic Nationalist persona so completely. I immediately followed a line drawn from (A) the Kirk killing to (B) the internal conflict on the Right to (C) questions about the actions of the Kirk shooter's LDS upbringing. Whether accurate or not, I found myself asking a serious question: Did this man specifically attack an LDS church to get back at the shooter's community?
Since the Kirk killing, other attacks that have happened as revenge, striking where Trump and his ilk aimed. Trans people have been attacked, verbally and physically beaten. There were threats to shoot up a Pride Parade. Democrats and their families have been targeted with death threats. Online threats abound. Yet another enemies list was drawn up by Kirk supporters, an unsurprising thing based on Kirk's own enemies list of educators. Utah's Governor Cox has seen his mildly humanizing response to trans kids thrown back in his face. (Read his 75,000, 4, 1, 86 and 56 comments.)
In addition, America since had more mass shootings, rising to 324 in the nine months of this year alone. So for this shooting to have occurred in this set of circumstances leaves a trail of bread crumbs back to the Kirk shooting. But the shooter is dead. His social media has been largely scrubbed. As yet, no manifesto has appeared or leaked. We are left with more questions than answers. More speculation and conjecture. And more of the same Why! What the hell is wrong with this country?
********************************************
And now for a lesson which might be humorous if it weren't factually correct...
How to Tell the Difference Between a Lone Wolf and a Coordinated Effort by the Radical Left ---by Carlos Greaves
If a Democratic lawmaker and her husband are gunned down, it’s an isolated incident carried out by a lone wolf.
If a right-wing activist is gunned down, it’s part of a coordinated effort by the radical left to incite violence.
If a gunman murders nineteen children at an elementary school, it’s disgusting to politicize the tragedy by talking about gun control.
If a Republican presidential candidate is targeted in an assassination attempt, it’s fair to blame it on left-wing rhetoric before the shooter has even been identified.
If a Christian Nationalist shoots up a synagogue, his values don’t reflect Christianity as a whole.
If a transgender woman shoots up a Catholic school, it’s because the entire LGBTQ community is conspiring to destroy Christianity. RuPaul probably ordered the hit.
If a man with a knife is arrested a block away from the home of a conservative Supreme Court justice, it’s a heinous act brought on by the radical feminist movement’s anger toward him.
If a man nearly beats the husband of a liberal Speaker of the House to death with a hammer, it’s a running joke for the next three years.
If a man shoots a Democratic congresswoman, he’s a mentally disturbed individual.
If a man shoots a Republican congressman, it’s because Bernie Sanders brainwashed him and turned him into a sleeper agent who is activated by the phrase “tax cut.”
If a mentally ill Black man fatally stabs a woman riding the light rail, it’s a “nationwide failure” on the part of Democrats.
If an Islamophobic white man fatally stabs two people riding the light rail, there’s no reason to think Republicans have done anything in the past twenty-five years to foment hatred of Muslims. Some people just wake up one morning hating entire groups of people.
If a white man is murdered by a sniper, anyone who so much as suggests that the killer’s motive may have been related to comments the victim made in the past should be fired from their job, put on a watch list, and doxxed. How dare they say anything that could be interpreted as being critical of the deceased?
If a Black man is murdered by the police, anyone digging up dirt on the victim to explain why his death was justified—like crimes he committed twenty years ago, or claiming he actually overdosed—is just laying out the facts.
If a Democratic governor talks about punching people in the mouth, he is obviously filled with insatiable bloodlust.
If a Republican president talks about punching people in the mouth, you’re the violent one for thinking he was being serious.
If a Democratic president is moved to tears by violence, he’s faking it.
If a Republican president repeatedly calls for violence, it’s just because he’s so full of love for America.
If a congresswoman says “We have to fight” while speaking at a rally about government accountability, she didn’t mean “fight” as in “apply sustained political pressure,” she meant “fight” as in “stab those bureaucrats until they release their data.”
If a Republican president says “We have to fight” to a group of armed rioters after months of repeatedly claiming an election has been stolen, he didn’t mean “fight” as in “storm the Capitol,” he meant “fight” as in the Beastie Boys’ lyrics “fight for your right to paaaar-tay.”
If a Democrat calls Republicans “fascists,” he basically just signed their death warrants.
If a Republican calls Democrats “Marxists,” or “the enemy from within,” or “vermin,” or “human scum,” he’s just trying to fire up the crowd.
If a social media addicted billionaire says “The left is the party of murder,” it’s an indisputable fact.
If a think tank founded by the Koch brothers combs through the data and concludes that right-wing terrorism is responsible for far more deaths than left-wing terrorism, they were probably just cherry-picking.
All political violence is wrong.
But some political violence is more wrong than others.
*********************************************
If the Republicans chose Utah Governor Cox as a Presidential candidate, they would go a long way in rejecting Trumpism and its embrace of violence. But they like sowing division and distracting from class warfare and the embrace of oligarchy and kleptocracy. BTW, release the Epstein Files!
*********************************************
In closing, comfort food. Bread, a food which crosses cultural boundaries. A food so comforting even the gluten intolerant seek ways to eat it.
