Hard Heads and Hammers
Fake take-aways from the Paul Pelosi attack - the ones you will be (pardon the expression) hammered with from now until November 8th:
This was a classic right-wing extremist. Well, maybe the attacker is a right-wing extremist, but he's not "classic." The MSM stereotype of a "right-wing extremist" is not a Berkeley nudist hemp jewelry designer who sports LGBT+ flags. Assuming this loser is (some previously unknown sub-specie of) a "right-winger," so what? One crazy person's actions do not invalidate Conservatism, just as the North Dakota car murderer does not invalidate Leftism.*
Conservative "rhetoric" caused this horrible attack and should be silenced. Uh, no. Some rando nut's behavior is not an excuse to undo Freedom of Speech. Sorry. Not sorry. As an aside: real vitriol and violence-inciting hate comes much more consistently, and with much more establishment support and sanction, from Leftists than Conservatives.
Anyone who posts any doubt about the immediate MSM narrative should resign. From whatever. Again, no. Again, not sorry. At this point, the burden of proof is on the "journalists," because they have done such a crappy job until now. And, btw, who cares how this happened? The only thing that matters is that an old man was injured in his home, which is horrible. And we believe he is going to be ok, which is wonderful. How it happened only matters because, if it was different from the initial description, it will shut up leftists, who are cynically trying to use it as an election tool.
Anyone who posts an "insensitive" comment about the incident should resign. Again, no. It is not cool for anyone to say hurtful things just for fun, but (a) it's unlikely Paul Pelosi will read them or care, (b) you don't have privity to be hurt on his behalf and (c) free speech has to be worth that cost.
"Everyone should immediately condemn this horrible act." Ok, sure. "Everyone condemns this horrible act." There. Now, we have checked that box. Let's quit yapping about that. Yes, this was awful. Wish it hadn't happened. But this has little to do with public policy ...
Except for the following real take-aways:
MSM has lost all credibility. That's why people don't believe their narrative. We all said it as soon as we got news of the attack: "this is almost certainly a disturbed person. They will have done and said strange things before this. If there is any way to construe any of it as "right-wing" they will. And the MSM and Democrats (but I repeat myself) will try desperately to pin it on Republicans (and their "rhetoric") ahead of the mid-terms." The problem we have now is you can't believe what you are being told, even if it happens to be true, because they lie all the time - in boot-licking subservience to one side of the aisle. Journalistic integrity has become an oxymoron.
San Francisco is unlivable. Apparently for everyone. Just like other Democratic-controlled cities.
Banning guns will not solve the crime problem. If the current description of the crime (that this was an unknown nut, who broke in and violently attacked Pelosi) is accurate, I wish Mr. Pelosi had a gun and was able to deter the invader (or, if necessary, shoot him) before the creep hit him.
Illegal immigration needs to be seriously addressed. It is rational to assume illegal immigrants, like Pelosi's attacker, disproportionately commit crimes (that is, in addition to the crime of being here illegally).**
* alleged. btw, Leftism is more than capable of invalidating itself.
** studies on this subject are notoriously inconclusive, due to (unconscionable) bias and poor government reporting.